[WikiEN-l] dueling templates

[Ray Saintonge]

Brock Weller wrote:
> Trivia sections are not encyclopedic. 
Bullshit!
> We require non-trivial sources,
> and we shouldnt be one ourselves. If they dont fit elsewhere then they
> are rightly dropped. 
The only ones who believe that are so pompous and self-absorbed that 
they have lost all capacity to determine what is important or 
interesting to readers?
> As for it being harder to re add them, good. Itll
> keep them out longer. The harder the crap is to keep in the pedia, the
> better off we all are. 
So what you're telling me is that YOU are singularly equipped to 
recognize crap.  Do you have any other jokes?
> You can thank us for the usable encyclopedia
> later when you figure it out.
>   
Why should I thank anyone whose stated aim is to be destructive?
Ec
> On 9/7/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>   
>> Steve Bennett wrote:
>>     
>>> On 9/7/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> If people/bots are doing that, they should be stopped. Last time I
>>>> read the appropriate policy it said to integrate trivia into the rest
>>>> of the article, not remove it.
>>>>         
>>> Yeah, trivia sections are "good" in the sense that we can quickly
>>> identify material that needs a better home. Of course, sometimes the
>>> material just seems too tangential to rescue.
>>>       
>> I'm not opposed to trivia sections, and perhaps it is that tangentiality
>> that justifies having such material in a separate section rather than
>> having it integrated into the body of the article where its appearance
>> may sometimes seem strained.
>>
>> Ec
>>