Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-07-31/The Onion

Is it worth mentioning Orlowski's typically negative Register articles[1][2] on Skutt, his "ironic" map of the US and Canada, and Angela's departure? -- ALoan (Talk) 15:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

A lot of people see Orlowski as mean-spirited rather than funny, although I guess it's possible to be both. Anyway, because of the additional overtones I think it doesn't fit in as well as the other examples, which can be mentioned in passing without calling for additional explanation. --Michael Snow 16:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Nobody can prevent humorous and would-be-humorous persons and publications from making use/misuse of Wikipedia or other publications. How would Uncyclopedia fit into this discussion?

I cannot be the only person who "tidies up" typos without necessarily signing in - and how will a authenticated name system actually work (many people with the same name etc)? How would Wikipedia prevent me from signing in under multiple pen names (whether or not with supporting evidence)? Wikipedia should avoid the problems arising from "kneejerk legislation" (see your local legislature for examples). It might be more appropriate to consider what to do with vandalised pages once they have been reverted to something sensible

Just a few ideas for the discussion.

Jackiespeel 12:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)