At 04:24 PM 6/22/2011, Harry Veeder wrote:
----- Original Message ----
> Stop right there. You are citing Wikipedia as evidence?
Are you saying that it is wrong and that your conception of RH is right?
No. That would be stupid unless I spent a lot of time with that
article, read and considered the references, etc. What I'm actually
saying is that Wikipedia is not an authority at all. If you want to
make a citation with some authority, cite the source for the claim in
the article. Once upon a time I'd have gone there and done that, and
I've found lots of these claims that turn out to be unsupported by
the source, the claim in the text was synthesis or original research
by the editor.
But I'm banned on Wikipedia, and I don't waste perfectly good IP or
established sock puppets on mere bullshit.
And maybe the article is right. I'm unconvinced that Mr. Veeder
understands what is being said.
