Fun talk:Timex Sinclair 1000

So - are we now a history of computing site?--Bob^{bing up} 03:53, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

As it is incumbent upon me to justify the mission tag. This article has nothing to do with RationalWiki's core purposes:

1. Analyzing and refuting the anti-science movement. - FAIL
2. Analyzing and refuting the full range of crank ideas. - FAIL
3. Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism. -FAIL

Genghis^unbelieving 04:29, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Even with my fondness for the Sinclair ZX (as it's properly known) I concur. Silver Sloth 04:44, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Delete. Not enough goat. Thunderkatz^Ho! 09:31, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Either keep, or get rid of all the pro-immigration, pro-gay marriage, pro-single payer health care tripe too which have NOTHING to do with:

1. Analyzing and refuting the anti-science movement. - FAIL
2. Analyzing and refuting the full range of crank ideas. - FAIL
3. Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism. -FAIL Triple X 09:37, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Unless you believe, as many do around here, that they all pass on Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism. Silver Sloth 09:39, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

The belief that it is a good thing to tax (i.e. STEAL) in order to pay for others health care under the cocercion of the State and their taxing and police agencies IS authoritarianism. The belief that the United States or any other country can continue to take in immigrants to the extent that will lead to our population rising from 300 million to 400 million in a generation IS anti-science. Triple X 09:42, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Ok, so come and debate - you never know, you might even get some converts - but writing articles that do not fit with what this wiki is all about is trolling and will be treated as such. Silver Sloth 09:45, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

It's more pointy than trollish. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes.} 09:47, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

This is not Wikipedia. Triple X 09:49, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

No but, this isn't IgnoreCommonSenseAndBasicCourtesypedia either. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes.} 09:51, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Exactly. It is not an encyclopedia. We address contentious issues like the ones you have mentioned. There is no purpose for articles like this on random products & objects. Weaseloid 09:52, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Moved to Funspace. Weaseloid 09:57, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

But it's not funny. I propose deleting it. It's just trash some angry wandal left on our doorstep. ħuman 17:05, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

"We address contentious issues"? Who is Weaseloid and what gives him the grounds to speak for "we" given that he has only been here since July 31? Triple X 13:53, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Well, so what if I have? Does that make my opinion invalid? I have only been here a short while, but think I have a pretty good idea of what the purposes & boundaries of this Wiki are. Weaseloid 14:14, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

I agree with Weaseloid on this. He has not been here a long time - but longer than you Triple x, and he seems to have a better idea of appropriate articles. Also I should point out that we don't always stick rigidly to the "rules" but go with the community feeling. If you can get a consensus for your articles being in mainspace then I'm sure they will go there. If you can get a consensus for moving articles you don't like out of mainspace then they will go. However you don't seem to be doing a good job of consensus building at the moment so I rather doubt that things will change. Good luck though.--Bob^{bing up} 14:33, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

This article doesn't even have any "fun" in it. Unless we get some serious mission, lulz or mob support, then it goes. Genghis^unbelieving 14:47, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

I've been here longer than Weaseloid. March 18 is before July 31. Triple X 15:45, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Three edits on March 18, then nothing until today is not a convincing argument for seniority. Genghis^unbelieving 16:11, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

Weaseloid is correct, which is what makes him correct, not longevity. ħuman 17:05, 11 August 2008 (EDT)