Changes

:::::P. S. I can't resist pointing out... Aschlafly complains that "gossip and hundreds of thousands of entries about pop songs or celebrities are pervasive on Wikipedia." However, articles such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pikachu Pikachu] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Timberlake Justin Timberlake] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King The Lion King] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffyverse Buffyverse] are ''virtually free'' of Anglophilia or British spellings. So, either pop culture is pervasive on Wikipedia, or Anglophilia is pervasive on Wikipedia, but I don't see how both can be. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:41, 12 February 2007 (EST)

:::::P. S. I can't resist pointing out... Aschlafly complains that "gossip and hundreds of thousands of entries about pop songs or celebrities are pervasive on Wikipedia." However, articles such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pikachu Pikachu] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Timberlake Justin Timberlake] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King The Lion King] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffyverse Buffyverse] are ''virtually free'' of Anglophilia or British spellings. So, either pop culture is pervasive on Wikipedia, or Anglophilia is pervasive on Wikipedia, but I don't see how both can be. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:41, 12 February 2007 (EST)

I lost this conversation the moment it started. I think we went a lil too far, dont you Mr.Schlafly? I guess it doesnt matter what i think anyway.:) [[Will N.]]

I lost this conversation the moment it started. I think we went a lil too far, dont you Mr.Schlafly? I guess it doesnt matter what i think anyway.:) Will N.

: '''REPLY:'''  You make a good point, Will.  It does matter what you think.  However, note that we all learned something from this debate:  Wikipedia has copied material verbatim from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.  I didn't know that before this discussion.  That explains some of the obscure and pecularly English descriptions in many entries.  Also, it shows that Wikipedia is not completely original.

: '''REPLY:'''  You make a good point, Will.  It does matter what you think.  However, note that we all learned something from this debate:  Wikipedia has copied material verbatim from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.  I didn't know that before this discussion.  That explains some of the obscure and pecularly English descriptions in many entries.  Also, it shows that Wikipedia is not completely original.