Talk:Encyclopædia Britannica

Encyclopædia Britannica[edit]

It is actually spelled with the weird æ grapheme, so I'll move it there. YB 17:26, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

Marking[edit]

I guess certain characters didn't parse well. tmtoulouse ^harass 01:09, 11 September 2007 (MDT)

A minor issue, considering. Nothing we can't fix on the fly. I take it we shouldn't risk "permanent" edits yet? human^{be in} 01:19, 11 September 2007 (MDT)

Wrong[edit]

Sorry to say this but most of the thing here are wrong. Encyclopaedia Britannica and Encyclopedia Americana seem to have longer article on important things such Ebira, a people numbering over 300,000 in Nigeria, whereas Wikipedia has a short sentence on them. The same is the case for the Sahaptin people. What you say about hyperlinks and user account can be disprove by going to the website.Ghy213 (talk) 21:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Is snarky, or supposed to be. ^{I am eating}

_& honey^chat 21:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Yup. Very much so. ħuman

02:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Britannica's homeopathy article[edit]

It seems that every Britannica article can now be read for free online (provided you can stand the ads). I hope you won't miss this gem: homeopathy My (layman's) observations about it: the article should state at the beginning that homeopathy is uncontroversially (at least for scientists and philosophers of science) a pseudoscience; besides, I find that writing that it "has been criticized for focusing on the symptoms rather than on the underlying causes of disease" is a very poor summary of the criticism of homeopathy, also because its efficacy on symptoms cannot be greater than the placebo effect, homeopathic remedies being fresh water. It should also be noted that there are no critical websites among the external links of the article. --Analytikone (talk) 00:27, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

So...[edit]

Any relevance other than conservamemes? Ty^talk 21:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Delete[edit]

Yep. Тy^No 17:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Agree. This is a leftover from 2007 when digs at CP were RW's raison d'etre. Those days are gone, fun though they were. Funspace or delete, but not main. Even the topic is off-mission, so a rewrite won't help. Sophie^{because liberals} 13:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)