--- Tony Sidaway minorityreport@bluebottle.com wrote:
You're being unreasonable by demanding that a tradition cannot apply to Wikipedia unless it also applies to "respected encyclopedias." There are no encyclopedias like Wikipedia. Britannica and Encarta don't change from one day to the next.
You are the one that said this was a tradition. I called you on that.
Nonsense. The European toilet paper holder article proposed is a transparent hoax and quite harmless. That Wikipedia cannot ever be more reliable than its latest edit is intuitively understood by all readers, so let's not foster the false impression that the situation is otherwise.
That is not an article. If I find it or any other hoax in the article namespace, then I'll delete it on sight (might move it to BJAODN).
-- mav
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Daniel Mayer said:
--- Tony Sidaway minorityreport@bluebottle.com wrote:
You're being unreasonable by demanding that a tradition cannot apply to Wikipedia unless it also applies to "respected encyclopedias." There are no encyclopedias like Wikipedia. Britannica and Encarta don't change from one day to the next.
You are the one that said this was a tradition. I called you on that.
Clearly you misunderstood me. April Fools is a longstanding tradition. The fact that "respected encyclopedias" do not have the opportunity to indulge in it is neither here nor there. [...]
That is not an article. If I find it or any other hoax in the article namespace, then I'll delete it on sight (might move it to BJAODN).
Then the joke is on you. Lighten up.