Jump to content

Talk:List of common misconceptions: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 14d) to Talk:List of common misconceptions/Archive 16.
No edit summary
Line 84: Line 84:


I don't recall any part of ''It's a Wonderful Life'' claiming that angels were formerly human. The fact that angels are said to be wingless and then earn their wings does not at all imply that they were human. Can someone provide a quote where the movie makes this claim?[[User:Fyrael| -- Fyrefly ]] ([[User talk:Fyrael|talk]]) 22:15, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't recall any part of ''It's a Wonderful Life'' claiming that angels were formerly human. The fact that angels are said to be wingless and then earn their wings does not at all imply that they were human. Can someone provide a quote where the movie makes this claim?[[User:Fyrael| -- Fyrefly ]] ([[User talk:Fyrael|talk]]) 22:15, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

== Teflon and velcro are not spin-off products from NASA space projects ==

I think it is very relevant, and both article have references of this fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teflon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velcro

Revision as of 04:43, 16 September 2011

Please read before proposing new entries

A rigid consensus on inclusion criteria for this list does not exist, but any proposed new entries to the article must at least fulfill the following:

  • The common misconception's main topic has an article of its own.
  • The item is reliably sourced, both with respect to the factual contents of the item and the fact that it is a common misconception.
  • The common misconception is mentioned in its topic article with sources.
  • The common misconception is current, as opposed to ancient or obsolete.

If you propose an entry that does not fulfill these criteria but you still think should be included, please include your rationale for inclusion.

WikiProject iconLists List‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
ListThis article has been rated as List-class on the project's quality scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Former FLCList of common misconceptions is a former featured list candidate. Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 29, 2006Articles for deletionNo consensus
March 24, 2009Articles for deletionKept
February 8, 2011Articles for deletionNo consensus
April 25, 2011Featured list candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured list candidate

References

Ich bin ein Berliner

While the missconception that the Berlins did not think Kennedy to state that he is a Pfannkuchen, at least today the Berliner Pfannkuchen is not usually called a "Pfannkuchen" but a "Berliner" (I can say this pretty safe as I am a german myself) also because if you would call woth the regular pancake as well as the jelly doughnout "Pfannkuchen" it woould be hard to decide wich one is ment.

I have also heard of this common missconceptions but at least today we take it as a joke towards the stupidy of the americans (having translated Kennedy´s words wrong) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skullls (talkcontribs) 21:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Berliner Pfannkuchen are called 'Pfannkuchen' in Berlin and east germany and 'Berliner' in most of west germany (check the wiki article on Berliner Pfannkuchen). The entry is correct in the sense that the people of Berlin did not laugh about this, many in west germany did though (and still do, it is a common joke, also featured in TV comedy shows). I would adivise to clear up the misconception. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.230.212.75 (talk) 09:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

small grammatical error

Under the Evolution heading, the paragraph starting with the word "Mammals", the following sentence: "With the rise of phylogenetic nomenclature in the 1990s, "reptile" also sometimes became use as a synonym for Sauropsida, which exclude the basal amniotes and the synapsid line.[176]", "became use" should read "became used". 129.111.62.224 (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ick. I changed it to "reptile also began to be used as a synonym...". Thanks for pointing out the error. Looie496 (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does this line make sense?

Under the Chemistry section, the last line: "In fact, the lead frames of the windows are less viscous than the panes, and if glass was indeed a slow moving liquid, the panes would warp at a higher degree.[178][179]" The section is arguing that glass isn't viscous and then goes to say that the lead frames are less viscous than the panes, which would mean that the panes have some viscosity and seems to be counter to the rest of the line. Also the last part that "if glass was indeed a slow moving liquid, the panes would warp at a higher degree." seems too obvious to state. I searched but couldn't find anything regarding the relationship between the viscosity of lead and glass in either of the two sources cited. 129.111.62.224 (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Angels were previously humans in It's a Wonderful Life?

An entry under Religion reads "The Bible does not teach that humans can or will become angels after death.[309][310][311] This myth has been proliferated by films such as It's a Wonderful Life (1946) and Unlikely Angel (1996)."

I don't recall any part of It's a Wonderful Life claiming that angels were formerly human. The fact that angels are said to be wingless and then earn their wings does not at all imply that they were human. Can someone provide a quote where the movie makes this claim? -- Fyrefly (talk) 22:15, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Teflon and velcro are not spin-off products from NASA space projects

I think it is very relevant, and both article have references of this fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teflon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velcro