RationalWiki talk:Proposed Article of the Weak

New sections should be created to discuss actual proposals, if they seem worthwhile.

Scheduling
Do we really need to try to put up a new one every week? On another tack, would that be a good discipline to try to stick to so it doesn't turn in to a new one every 3 months?  ħ uman  20:38, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
 * If we are unable to come up with one, or no one wants to do the work, then I don't think it is the end of the world to let one slide. But I also think part of the value of this feature is having a good sized number of articles go through the vetting proccess, and having new content reliably delivered is always good. I thought we might have to let the first one extend a little longer to get people voting on it, but I am pretty happy with the 40-50 votes we will get on it. It will provide a nice spread for analysis. I think we are ready for a new one on Monday if we get a pick. 20:40, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I agree. And you are going to leave the voting and comments (closed=no) turned on for a little longer anyway, right?  Are you going to add a "Previous Weak Articles" link to the extension, make it a sub page, that links via dpl to all the other sub pages, then we move previous AotWs to sub page names?  Let me rephrase that from "Are you going to" to "Please do this" ;)  ħ uman  20:43, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Yea, there is no reason to "close" the voting while we continue to let it grow. Eventually, archived votes should be closed, so that is why I implemented the close feature. If we get one for this Monday I will get all that setup on Sunday. 20:46, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Kick starting new AotW fodder
I had an idea the other day while looking at this. We could just "look ahead" at what CP will be running and see if any are good targets for the AotW. We can also look at the ones they have run in the past. I think it would be cool, and kind of funny, if at least some of time our AotW was the same as theirs... thoughts?  ħ uman  17:08, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Actual proposals

 * cp:Feminism
 * cp:Anti-Feminism  ħ uman 

Googling "conservapedia" (No, I haven't bookmarked it) gives a list of its most popular articles. Discounting Kangaroo (so last year, darling) and Examples of bias in Wikipedia (too meta?) we have: as possible candidates. cp:Barack Obama would be a good one to put up too, should attract interest.
 * cp:Homosexuality
 * cp:Global warming
 * cp:Jesus Christ

I'd better stop there, while rummaging in cp:Talk:Genesis I discovered a sensible, intelligent conversation I had with Philip J Rayment. I need a lie down. Anyway, I hereby propose the above four links. Totnesmartin 18:46, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Alternatively, we could really mess with them by choosing their own weekly featured article... Totnesmartin 18:52, 26 July 2008 (EDT)


 * Maybe we should do a non-CP one next week? Just so we get into the habit of not being exclusively CP focused? 17:06, 30 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Good idea. Also, we don't have to change it every week, do we?  Just when we are ready with a new one?  Any bright ideas where to start?  How close to "newsy" do we want to go?  ħ uman  19:03, 30 July 2008 (EDT)
 * There's newsy stuff by the bukkitlode at WIGO - perhaps AOTW doesn't have to be topical at all. Having "done" creationism for the first one, we could go elsewhere this week (eg a conspiracy or alt health site?) I also think that it should be a weekly article - it'll be a lot easier to set up now the coding has been sorted out, and the high(ish) turnover of articles will attract readers - seeing the same thing up there for too many days turns people away from websites, apparently. Totnesmartin 17:16, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

David Kirby's Evidence of Harm
I have put up my proposal for AOTW, it is a non-cp, non-evolution, non-religious, semi-non-political article that I think fits our mission well. It is a good test for our "criteria" and how well they might extrapolate out. It is also cool cause Kirby has had some interaction with RW participants in the past. Thoughts? 18:16, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Lookin' it over. You should install the spole-cheker in your firefox ;)  ħ uman  19:07, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I think it might be a decent choice. But first ;) let's get some of the site's other "writers" (not scientists) to edit Template:AOTW_Descriptions?  I like what you added, but now we need to copyedit/rewrite, improve flow, make ourselves look smart, etc.  That's my short-term, over the weekend opinon.  That addressed, I am for using this new AotW starting Monday.  ħ uman  00:21, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I asked AKjeldson if he would take a look at the whole thing. So does that mean I can start running my anovas soon? I am itching to do it... 00:31, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I don't know what your "anovas" are, perhaps you should keep them to yourself? Also, let's get Doc in on this editing thing, re: above link.  Brainz!!!! We want many!  ħ uman  00:34, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Analysis of Variance....much fun to be had...though as a Bayesian I shouldn't be doing them, they are just easier to work with. Maybe I will include some Bayesian analysis as well.....this is going to be fun! I thought Doc might have fallen under the "scientist" category. 00:38, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I hassled Doc to chime in. PS, "anovas" = "Analysis of Variance"??? WTF? Who ever, ever, ever, used that abbreviation?  Now I have to go back and wp: it to know what the hell you are drinking about! (in "preview" only, of course)    ħ uman  00:42, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
 * You don't have enough data yet. Sorry this project is slow in delivering your Master's, but you are doing it on the cheap and easy, after all.   ħ uman  00:43, 2 August 2008 (EDT)

Moon landing hoax
I'd like to propose the Moon landing hoax for our next article. The primary site for the hoax claims is this; I'll add counterclaim sites soon. Wikipedia's article is good on the rebuttal, but does anyone know of any others? Totnesmartin 18:13, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
 * A critical review of the Fox News special
 * Bad Astronomy on the same programme
 * Analysis of photographs used in the programme
 * Jim Scotti's page on the "controversy" (Jim who?
 * A site dedicated "to debunk(ing) the so-called conspiracy theories that state such a landing may never have occurred."
 * This page explains how the Moon rocks really did come from the Moon
 * Thekeyboard.org on the "hoax2
 * A PDF on the subject

...how much pwnage do you want for this?


 * My favourite one has always been the Bad Astronomy one. I had thought that Snopes had something detailed on it as well, but I can't turn it up now. But I'm up for article of the weak.--Bobbing up 07:33, 7 August 2008 (EDT)

It's ready to go now,i think. does anyone else have comments? Totnesmartin 05:40, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I haven't reviewed the sites, etc., but it looks good to me. Is our article reasonably good? After that question I am all for this going in Sunday night.  ħ uman  21:28, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Before going "live", does anyone think it should more/less/different slider bars or some nifty checkboxes, like Trent is working on here? Or just run with what we have?  ħ uman  21:31, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I created generic pseudoscience data files and set this to use them with voting closed. Take a look and see what you think. 14:18, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Please delay moving the new AOTW
I am going to be working on a significant alteration in the code behind AOTW. Let me be the one to move the new AOTW over when the time is right, I will be working diligently on it tomorrow so hopefully will get it done but what I am trying to do is not easy so I may not be able to do it in one night. The current AOTW may need to stay up an extra day. Thanks. 03:02, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I wasn't going to do it as I have now idea how to do things like resetting the sliders etc. Totnesmartin 14:25, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Well what do you think about the sliders/check boxes I have set up now for it? Any alterations/deletions/additions/suggestions would be appreciated. 14:28, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Are they all going to be on the page? I mean, yay tickybox and all, but do we want people to get lost in the middle? But if there's only a few per page from this spread, then yes it's a good range, as far as I can tell. Totnesmartin 15:14, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Each AotW gets its own subpages set up with only the sliders and checkboxes deemed appropriate for it. So the trick now is to figure out what they should be for the Moon landing article... (you can make up new ones, as well)  ħ uman  16:36, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I mean really, how many is too many? Is it really that overwhelming? Anyway, I would like to get the new AOTW in place fairly soon so be bold any offer any suggestions that can get this moving forward. 18:51, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Put it on the main page, it's about five minutes to Tuesday here. Totnesmartin 18:55, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Once it gets moved we can't change the vote options. So now is the time to prune, improve, etc. 19:05, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * There's no real requirement to do this weekly or to always do it Sunday night. We spell it "weak" for more than one reason ;)  ħ uman  20:51, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Yea but should still aim for it roughly, and we have one ready to go if we just work out a last few details. 20:52, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * True. Why not just pick the ones you think apply and launch it?  By the next changeover (we should work on an eight day week!) people will be more used to these new options, the control they have, and will be thinking of them right from the beginning.  ħ uman  20:59, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I pretty much did, I erred on the side of inclusion, but ones that I think would be good are currently up. 21:00, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

We need a new one if possible for Monday Aug 18
Perhaps we should make wiki4cam famous? Surely they have a "passable" homeopathy article or something?  ħ uman  01:08, 17 August 2008 (EDT)

Or do we go back to CP for another "classic"? Easy work there... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  01:09, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I am tempted to recommend doing a CP article. So I guess maybe that's what I will do. We have a nice side-by-side of their atheism article here? Meh? 01:33, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm not sure we do. Our atheism article isn't formatted very well, as I recall.  Well, we all of Sunday... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  01:59, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Conservapedia:Atheism is what I was thinking of. 02:01, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Let's use the intercom to call all hands on deck on our atheism article? (With a 24 hour expiry ;)) <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:05, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * How about tomorrow give people a chance to respond to the existing APB? 02:14, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I wuz wrong, our abortion article is an abortion. We have a decent atheism article.  Let's rip Kendoll a new one.  You want to wait a week for a new one and figure out the intercom thing, that's fine with me. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:27, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I don't know if we have to wait a whole week but we were a few days late getting this one up anyway, we could do an 8 day week think till we get back on schedule or something. Also Susan came up with the idea of targeted intercom messages that I kind of liked. So people with an interest in specific topics could sign up to receive announcements about them. So AOTW interested folks would sign up for the AOTW list, etc.  02:31, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Yes, no, maybe, I agree. Let's get the intercom working, AotW does not have to be weekly.  But Ken's Atheism article would be a prize.  The "intro" need to be well written though, with all his SEO crap documented.  And, yes, Susan's idea is good... and complicated of course.  Which you love... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:44, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Concur, let us aim for getting the Atheism article up there by Tues night? Need deadlines or I don't work. 02:46, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * OK, let's try this idea - we let Sunday ride as people chime in on the intercom. Then we send out a request for AotW input on the atheism thing? And hope we build some great text?  Remember, we still need to get the community on board on the whole AotW thing, most are oblivious, I think? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:49, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Which is why I want to go back to some CP article for a couple weeks. The non-cp articles were a good stress test for the concept and lead to some improvements but to build a following, for better or worse, CP is the bait. 02:50, 17 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Yup, and the easy target. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  03:10, 17 August 2008 (EDT)

Proposal: CP:Atheism. It's idiotic, our article is pretty decent, all we need are a few good external links and some text. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:05, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

AOTW Main page
Is it worth it to include a "what" our AOTW is on the main page? 00:19, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh, yeah, yup, sure. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:55, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

CP's Atheism article AOTW
It has been put forward and accepted by proclamation (default) that this week's RationalWiki:Article of the Weak should be conservapedia's cp:atheism article. What we need is a succinct description and recommended links to refer people to. We have a side-by-side of the article and our own atheism article. What else? Also what needs input is the choice of "sliders" and "checkboxes." These can be altered in two places Template:Sliders/conservapedia and Template:Check/conservapedia. If people have feedback but don't want to alter the templates (it is a little intimidating I know) please just leave it here on the talk. And thanks for helping out! 00:41, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I can't seem to vote. Or see the "consensus" bits. 00:58, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * That's cause they are "disabled" as it is not "live" yet. We are constructing it for the live aotw. We need the various elements in place first. 01:00, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * We gotta get some people to help out with this... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  19:54, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * How? 20:56, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I dunno, go 'round their houses and beat on their doors? Hire a town crier to do it for us?  Post a message site-wide begging for help?  Hehe... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  22:43, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Bah, or just do it. 22:45, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Got some good ELs? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:35, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

Well we have:

14:49, 20 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Our Atheism article
 * Our side-by-side of CP's Conservapedia:Atheism
 * Our Russell's Teapot article ?
 * Infidel's has a list of various introuductions
 * There is also always wp:Atheism.
 * Online works of famous writers?
 * Yeah, looking good. I'd forgotten about the SxS - that should be the first link we offer up. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  15:00, 20 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Should we pick one or two good ones from infidels and a good writer to refer to? Bertrand Russel is always good :). Or link to the repositories? 15:20, 20 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I think we should do the work of picking the good ones, although we can say where there are more (the repositories). And, yes, Russell is an excellent choice. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  16:15, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

September 1 AotW
Tmt suggested one of the CP "Liberal X" articles, I think it might be fun to do all of them... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  17:18, 31 August 2008 (EDT)
 * all at once? given that we are just starting the politcal games in the US, "liberal" v. real liberal would be fun to do. &mdash; Unsigned, by: WaitingforGodot / talk / contribs
 * I dunno... yeah, all at once. A lot of them aren't really so much articles as short bulleted lists, and the sheer number of them and their idiocy adds to the humor, and broadens the target. Their "liberal" article could be the main choice, of course. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  18:24, 31 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Shall we start by making a list of what articles are over there? 18:28, 31 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Someone has/had a "matrix" of them somewhere - it may be in the CP namespace by now. But, yes, let's list them here.  A simple search ought to find them. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  18:42, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

Conveniently, they all seem to be listed at cp:liberal:


 * Articles about liberals
 * cp:Classical liberal
 * cp:Drinking Liberally
 * cp:Godless liberal
 * cp:Hollywood values
 * cp:Last wordism
 * Liberal activists
 * cp:Liberal arts
 * cp:Liberal Arts college
 * cp:Liberal Bias
 * Liberal celebrity obsession
 * Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia
 * cp:Liberal Christianity
 * cp:Liberal deceit
 * cp:Liberal Democrats
 * cp:Liberal denial
 * cp:Liberal Elite
 * Liberal Falsehoods
 * cp:Liberal Fascism
 * cp:Liberal friendship
 * cp:Liberal Gloss
 * cp:Liberal grading
 * cp:Liberal hate speech
 * cp:Liberal Hypocrisy
 * Liberal hysteria
 * cp:Liberal ideology
 * Liberal Intellectualism
 * cp:Liberalism and art
 * cp:Liberal labels
 * Liberal Lies About the American Right
 * cp:Liberal logic
 * Liberal Mind
 * cp:Liberal Myths
 * cp:Liberal obfuscation
 * cp:Liberal Party
 * cp:Liberal quotient
 * cp:Liberal supremacist
 * Liberal Style
 * cp:Liberal tools
 * cp:Liberal tricks
 * cp:Liberal values
 * cp:Massachusetts liberal
 * cp:Professor values

<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  18:56, 31 August 2008 (EDT)


 * cp:Godless liberal
 * cp:Liberal Bias
 * cp:Liberal deceit
 * cp:Liberal Democrats
 * cp:Liberal denial
 * cp:Liberal Elite
 * cp:Liberal Fascism
 * cp:Liberal friendship
 * cp:Liberal Gloss
 * cp:Liberal grading
 * cp:Liberal hate speech
 * cp:Liberal Hypocrisy
 * cp:Liberal ideology
 * cp:Liberalism and art
 * cp:Liberal labels
 * cp:Liberal logic
 * cp:Liberal Myths
 * cp:Liberal obfuscation
 * cp:Liberal Party
 * cp:Liberal quotient
 * cp:Liberal supremacist
 * cp:Liberal tools
 * cp:Liberal tricks
 * cp:Liberal values
 * cp:Massachusetts liberal
 * cp:Liberal fairness

Working on trimming it down to what we should actually put up. 19:06, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia only?
I'm sure this has already been asked, but I must've missed the answer—is the Article of the Weak limited to Conservapedia articles only? 11:08, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Not at all, in fact, we have already done one or two that weren't CP. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  12:42, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Good, good. Once I get my own internet connection back, I hope to contribute to AotW regularly.   13:50, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Excellent, this team could use a few members ;) <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  14:23, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Sarah Palin
It's CP's aotw, let's jump on it. It's work :( though.

We need to pick appropriate slider bars, please help before I try to finalize to tomorrow. Also I'll have to archive the last AotW, any help appreciated.

Se re: SP, we link to our article, WP's article, and where else? Any assistance appreciated...

something I think I am missing in RW: Proposed AOTW
I need a revalation on the purported location of the button I am supposed to use to submit ratings. Thieh 00:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, it should be just below the check off buttons - just below quote mining, in this case. You might want to report this to Nx.  Oh, and tell him your OS and browser too.  00:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Rating is closed, that's why. (closed=yes parameter) --  Nx / talk 08:44, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposal for May 09 who knows when replacement
Someone is working on a side-by-side of AIG's (I think) take on the Martian volcano thingie. I think it might make a nice AotW target once our SxS is ready as the on-site rebuttal. 00:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt that the original article is sufficiently AOTW-ish. It's more about expalining the potential for creationists to use Mars data than an analysis of the data itself, unfortuneately. However if anyone else thinks differently, pipe up. Totnesmartin 09:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I would like just about anything, this has been up for months. 09:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * OK then, I'll finish Tharsis. Should we rename to include surrounding regions? Totnesmartin 10:15, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok I have started the article when it is done it goes here. 10:44, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Global flood on Mars when the vapour pressure does not even allow water to be in liquid. I think we have new theories to debunk for Noah's ark.  But then I don't think it has enough wingnuttery.  Thieh 17:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, the article's pretty tame compared to previous AOTWs. there must be something out there... Totnesmartin 12:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Do we want to reschedule for June instead? 16:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Naw, we can just activate it as soon as it's ready. We're not on a schedule.  18:38, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll change the title for the section then. Revert if you find that not appropriate.   02:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I am going to put a quick AOTW until we get the Mars one up and running. 02:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I am in no state to critically read anything (guess why), but the latest ARJ article (dated a month ago- lotsa science for those guys, they seem to average one article per month) is titled "Implications of Polonium Radiohalos in Nested Plutons of the Tuolumne Intrusive Suite, Yosemite, California." ORLY? When I look at even the most niche peer-reviewed journal, I can at least recognize the titles as a English-based sentences.  This, on the other hand, is absolute word salad.  I guess they got tired of being called unscientific and decided that incomprehensiblity makes you look s-m-r-t.  I'm not the smartest man in the world, but I feel that I can hold my own.  If I am just too stupid to understand this sentence, please correct me.  But otherwise, I ask, WTF?  Corry 03:07, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Queue it up?
http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/

http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/About_Us

http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/mn37357/The_Popularity_of_Atheism Might be fun to play with. 05:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I like this one. 05:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's a winner, after the thing it is now, and after the Mars thing that has had so much work. Of course, I got this via wigo cp, and their borken news.  How hard can this be?  As hard as Trent & I made the frickin' process.  I wish we had an easier way to process these (that list of how to change it is stupefying!).  How's it going with getting AotW updates on RC?  05:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

A couple off PZ Myer's blog

 * http://home.flash.net/~evt/rapture.htm
 * http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/sex_with_robots.html

As good as I think the robots one is, I think we should get started with the rapture one as it is starting very soon. 03:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Anything for a new AOTW. Pi, can you figure out a way to make AOTW "comments" turn up on recent changes?  03:38, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The AOTW extension is pretty old, I think it only just held together during the server move. It is about last on Nx's to do list. 03:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sad that it is. Seriously, the AOTW is mine & Trent's most serious failure.  He had the idea, and I helped make it "pretty", but I utterly failed in the "pretty" - as in user friendly - part.  And then we never figured out how to make it turn up on RC.  04:15, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

False flag flu
Looks like a good one to me. Shall we try and get it mocked up? 22:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

"Virtually all serious modern pandemics were the result of vaccines."!!! me again

Look, I found a crazy!
Here be a helping of Nostradamus, a hypothetical possibly existing comet that has not been discoverd but MUST exist, and the 2012 "Oh noes!" syndrome. And semi-time cube styling. Always a plus. 21:17, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is my favorite reading... "Many interpret Olympus Festulan to mean Mt. Olympus, near Greece. As this mountain is close to 10,000 ft high, we are looking at a massive tidal wave." I thought tidal waves occured in water. Meh, what do I know? 21:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not just one guy, Googling "nibiru" links to a lot of people stating "We are all gunna die in 2012!", save for one page stating the facts that "nirbiru" is a myth, and does not exist. 21:38, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Can Such Things (Vampires) Be Real?
 No further commentary necessary, really.--Mustex 21:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

How about this?
It's not the biggest, but it's different from what we normally have, and the evil-beatles trope is always good for a laugh. Totnesmartin (talk) 13:22, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It's certainly weird and seems to hit most of the bases.--BobBring back the hat! 14:18, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent pick. They even blaspheme the Goat!  Also, minor tidbit - "Never a more beautiful song was recorded than TIL THERE WAS YOU by The Beatles."  Granted, it's pretty and all, an early fave of theirs - but it's a cover, for crying out loud! Delightful grammage, too.  22:01, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I like it. Aceof Spades 22:20, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Should this be queued?
From our WIGO:Clogs, [|Is 2nd Coming of Jesus etched in night sky? (aka epic fail in Astronomy and Astrology)]  05:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)