[WikiEN-l] The boundaries of OR (contd)

[Ilmari Karonen]

jayjg wrote:
> 
> No, a source is only required for anything that is disputed. That's
> pretty fundamental, WP:V. Quite workable and highly desirable.

The problem with that, of course, is that, given sufficient time and 
sufficiently many people, _anything_ can and will be disputed, including 
the color of the sky on a clear day.

Or, let me quote the start of an actual argument from [[Talk:Elision]]:

"Oh, I deliberately used my version of showing speech because I dispute 
the IPA's. I deny the existence of the schwa, I object to r/R sounds as 
being difthongs, I refute its status of r and R as consonants but as 
vowels, I object to its fictive prescription of whether whichever words 
are aspirated or unaspirated, I object to its using lone or blended 
glyfs for clusters as careless overlooking of the intention of the key 
as showing a one-to-one relationship between sound and glyf, and as no 
part of speech was given to the words in my list. Do you wish to obscure 
my work from accuracy?"

-- 
Ilmari Karonen