zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. pbhjpb+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-05-14 14:02:27
Words not on Wikipedia, found on other sources, listed by frequency (perhaps with a date-weighting of the source document to reduce rating of older sources), would be an interesting way to find holes in Wikipedia's coverage.
replies(1): >>patric+h2
2. patric+h2[view] [source] 2020-05-14 14:13:27
>>pbhjpb+(OP)
Someone should make a Wikipedia page of that list. Oh, wait.
replies(1): >>pbhjpb+mz4
◧◩
3. pbhjpb+mz4[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-05-15 20:45:37
>>patric+h2
I like how you had information, made a sarcastic comment about it, but didn't share the actual information ... just in case your comment might prove helpful ...
replies(1): >>roryok+kV4
◧◩◪
4. roryok+kV4[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-05-15 23:05:09
>>pbhjpb+mz4
Are you saying the URL of that Wikipedia page is “actual information” that patrickthebold failed to share?

I think that page doesn’t exist. patrickthebold wasn’t sarcastically mocking people who were too lazy to look up that page. He was just making the point that as soon as a hypothetical list like that was uploaded to Wikipedia, it should be deleted, since those words would then be words found on Wikipedia.

[go to top]