In a message dated 6/10/2008 1:31:51 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, morven@gmail.com writes:
And we are certainly not bound to include every detail of something that can be verified. I'm not sure what useful purpose naming her brother serves, nor forum shopping this here.>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------- You forget that I'm a troll. Oh no. Well don't actually address the argument shall we.
At any rate, we're not talking about "Every detail" just one detail. Naming her brother serves the purpose of being consistent, logical, and direct. Her brother is named by ABC news. The broadcast is available off their own official site.
Not naming him, even though we link directly to the broadcast from her article, would seem to smack of censorship with the only intent being, that we don't link the name "Wiley" to our article on "Genie".
Talk about going down the silly road of pointlessness.
**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 11:24 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
You forget that I'm a troll. Oh no. Well don't actually address the argument shall we.
I don't think you're a troll. I simply disagree with you on this.
Not naming him, even though we link directly to the broadcast from her article, would seem to smack of censorship with the only intent being, that we don't link the name "Wiley" to our article on "Genie".
As far as I can tell, your only arguments for keeping the name in there are utter completeness, and because other people would like you not to and thus it's censorship.
As to the first, Wikipedia articles are not required to have every verifiable piece of information about their subjects; they have only what serves a useful purpose.
-Matt