Talk:OmniScriptum/Archives/2015

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Absurd ref

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I replaced the following ref

<ref>{{cite web |last= Nohn |first= Corinna | url = http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/wikipedia-kompilationen-bullshit-amen-okay-1.1015680 | title = Wikipedia-Kompilationen: "Bullshit, amen, okay" | language = German | publisher = [[Süddeutsche Zeitung]] | date = 2010-10-25 | accessdate = 2010-11-02 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/5u0GpZSXm | archivedate = 2010-11-04 | deadurl= no}}</ref>

found in OmniScriptum/Archives#Alphascript and Betascript Publishing, with {{cn}} bcz it entails either a clerical error or a claim to have the use of a time machine. IMO my undertaking to replace it would be counterproductive, bcz until the rest of the massively footnoted aarticle has been similarly inspected, there is every reason to presume that any (or all) of them may also be absurd on their respective faces.
--Jerzy•t 05:43, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand your reasoning or explanation, there is no contradiction of facts or dates. The reference is a German newspaper published in 2010, and it supports the statement. I am restoring this. Fences&Windows 21:38, 10 August 2015 (UTC)