Difference between revisions of "Talk:Wikipedia police"
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
The cited page doesn't reference or support the idea of "secret police". No factual basis.[[User:apjames|apjames]] | The cited page doesn't reference or support the idea of "secret police". No factual basis.[[User:apjames|apjames]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | Ah, I see someone found a +1 Tin Foil Hat. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 22:19, 23 March 2008 (EDT) |
Latest revision as of 02:19, March 24, 2008
Guess what I am going to ask. Do you have any evidence AT ALL to back up this page?--KimSell 13:48, 27 February 2008 (EST)
Come on. Seriously? Judging by the flurry of hilarious articles recenetly created by him, this guy has completely lost it. Also, should there be a mention of Conservapedia police, mentioning the likes of Karajou and Crocoite? His tenuous link to reality has finally been cut. Schoenberg 15:21, 27 February 2008 (EST)
Source please? For this page or any on this site, really. NoraReed 15:33, 27 February 2008 (EST)
This is getting ridiculous. I saw you make up this term on the main page Andy. You went from talking about the 'Wikipedia police' to saying, 'That deserves its own entry'. Based on...? MetcalfeM 15:44, 27 February 2008 (EST)
"They almost never have user names reflecting their real names"--well, with the amount of identity theft and perverts out there, isn't that what your supposed to do? Maestro 23:27, 27 February 2008 (EST) (Brian Katcher)
The cited page doesn't reference or support the idea of "secret police". No factual basis.apjames
Ah, I see someone found a +1 Tin Foil Hat. Barikada 22:19, 23 March 2008 (EDT)