Daniel Mayer wrote:
--- Seth Ilys <seth.ilys(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There are several examples of this in
[[nihilartikel]].
I didn’t see any examples of respected encyclopedias doing this.
If EB were to publish 1990's April Fool joke in 2005 it could be a
little out of date.
I did notice
this:
“It is not always simple to recognize a Nihilartikel. It is especially
difficult when the same fictitious entry is reprinted and adapted by multiple
reference works. In such cases, the multiple sources serve to bolster the
entry's authenticity, so that many come to believe that they are reading a
factual article.”
Just imagine, all these reputable publications failing to exercise due
dilligence. After April 1 the clues will certainly be there for all to
see. I wonder: Maybe the failure of these authoritative publications to
include the clues could be seen as some kind of violation of GFDL. :-)
This is certainly not something we should be
encouraging.
Fair enough, but we do want to encourage critical thinking.
Ec