Conservapedia talk:Namespaces

Mystery: a pseudo-namespace?
Is "Mystery:" really a pseudo-namespace? Pseudo-namespaces usually have one or more of the telltale signs: 1) signed comments on the non-Talk: page, with almost no discussion on the Talk: page, 2) doesn't meet mainspace's inclusion standards and/or makes it clear that mainspace policies don't have to be as strictly followed there, and/or 3) few if any backlinks/forwardlinks to mainspace, but rather have back/forwardlinks to User:- or project-space.

Two of the Mystery: articles have most of their backlinks from mainspace, and the others are orphaned. And they otherwise look like normal articles. Have these been set aside as something special? Just because something has a colon in the name doesn't necessarily make it a psuedo-namespace. --Toiretni 15:10, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I was going by the more technical method: The name is in the form "[noun]:Title" (You're right, not every title with a ":" is an indicator of a pseudo-namespace, but we have a pattern here - six articles with the same prefix. And in the case of the Operations, the "Operation:" thing is an accepted part of the name. The "Mystery:" thing isn't.), it doesn't meet mainspace standards (it's more of a question/answer essay), the title is usually given in the form of a question. I would argue that it meets your second condition there because the content is tiptoeing on the line between essay and debate while the subject wouldn't fly in the mainspace. In a way, it's both: An essay in the "Mystery" space, with a debate on the associated talk page. Just look at the epic discussion on cp:Talk:Mystery:Was John a Child? for example. --Sid 15:29, 8 August 2008 (EDT)