Talk:wikidiot

RFV discussion: March 2011–January 2012
Salvaged from ion. I see a capitalized cite (which I'll add to the cites page). &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * ¶ I doubt somebody who believes anything is “100%” accurate would have the brain‐power to operate a web‐browser in the first place, not to mention that there are definitely non‐facts (opinions) on Wikipedia. This entry is fatuous, the word obviöusly serves as an insulting accusation. --Pilcrow 19:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately a descriptive dictionary does not have the authority to judge whether a word is accurate or not; all it can do is tell the reader if and how it is used. — lexicógrafa &#124; háblame — 19:29, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, but it could be that those who use wikidiot mean "someone who tends to believe things on Wikipedia that he oughtn't" even if they say they mean "someone who believes everything on Wikipedia". &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 17:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Derogatory terms are often exaggerations of the truth, so both senses might warrant inclusion (although I don't know how exactly they'd be distinguished in citations); both what the speaker intends by the term, and what the referent actually is (does, believes etc.). — lexicógrafa &#124; háblame — 18:16, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)