Not pictured: The dynamic and eternal back-and-forth in the comments section of that article where Wikipedia purist nerds do battle with Wikipedia's cadre of silly gooses.
Purists hate that "cetacean" is used here and feel that the silly gooses are diluting the information on Wikipedia for a pun. They also complain that visitors to that page will be confused by the term, and that it will cause the social credit of Wikipedia as a whole to wane in the eyes of the world.
The gooses want the purist nerds to take a chill pill. I'm with the gooses. If the purists knew how often scribes in ancient times doodled pointless things like mounted snail combat and wildly exaggerated dick drawings on illuminated manuscripts then I'd presume they'd be okay with allowing a minor joke like this one, but I guess you can't please everyone.
Mmmerican, first time in Europe, in Brussels, graffiti all over centuries old statues. Like wtf?? Right.. there shit is just this shit, so it's where they do their shit
However, neither of those is the one in the picture, which shows the cetacean in question living in the coastal waters of South America. I believe this is Burmeister's porpoise, which now has a fairly disappointing image attached.
15 replies
Not pictured: The dynamic and eternal back-and-forth in the comments section of that article where Wikipedia purist nerds do battle with Wikipedia's cadre of silly gooses.
Purists hate that "cetacean" is used here and feel that the silly gooses are diluting the information on Wikipedia for a pun. They also complain that visitors to that page will be confused by the term, and that it will cause the social credit of Wikipedia as a whole to wane in the eyes of the world.
The gooses want the purist nerds to take a chill pill. I'm with the gooses. If the purists knew how often scribes in ancient times doodled pointless things like mounted snail combat and wildly exaggerated dick drawings on illuminated manuscripts then I'd presume they'd be okay with allowing a minor joke like this one, but I guess you can't please everyone.
That if Wikipedia survives 1500 years. Digital media tends to be much more fragile than traditional ones in that aspect.
Well, that if we survive 1500 years, but I'll let that for another discussion.
Fun fact: you can download the whole wikipedia and use it offline.
But how long will your storage media last? Will the technology required to read it still be available in 1500 years?
Mmmerican, first time in Europe, in Brussels, graffiti all over centuries old statues. Like wtf?? Right.. there shit is just this shit, so it's where they do their shit
Also (a picture of) a cetacean is literally needed.
Verified. It’s on the table entry for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamanend%27s_bottlenose_dolphin
Approved and vetted.
It's official.
The current page contains two [cetacean needed] blocks, one of which is Tamanend's bottlenose dolphin. The other is Deraniyagala's beaked whale.
However, neither of those is the one in the picture, which shows the cetacean in question living in the coastal waters of South America. I believe this is Burmeister's porpoise, which now has a fairly disappointing image attached.
Is this a pun ? I don't get it.
"Citation needed"
Ooooh OK. I feel stupid.
It’s a play on ‘citation needed’ Because cetacean (sih-TAY-shun) sounds like citation (sigh-TAY-shun)
You must pronounce cetacean very differently to me
Needs more saddam