[004]
76.248.8.17
Current Version
Changed line(s) 2 from:
n
has this. though the reversal of time only happens once, its stated that it has happened many times.
to:
has this. though the reversal of time only happens once in the show, its stated that it has happened many times.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
The problem I personally have with this page being potholed everywhere is not the fact that it IS potholed, but the fact that most of the potholes aren\'t even puns. A pun is a deliberate play on words. Most of the links I\'ve seen are from words that happen by sheer coincidence to be the same as part of a page title, but are otherwise perfectly normal in the sentence (as in, completely outside the definition of what a pun is).
An example: ScoringPoints, near the bottom, the entry for \
An example: ScoringPoints, near the bottom, the entry for \
to:
The thing that bugs me is that a lot of the potholes seem to have been randomly thrown into articles, on words and phrases that aren\\\'t even puns, and in the context used couldn\\\'t even be mistaken for such. It gets to levels similar to IsntItIronic in how things are identified as being \\\"puns\\\" that in fact aren\\\'t even close.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
An example: ScoringPoints, near the bottom, the entry for \
to:
An example: ScoringPoints, near the bottom, the entry for \\\"Nomic.\\\" The word \\\"point\\\" is used in-context. And yet it\\\'s marked as a pun. It\\\'s minor by itself, yes, but this exact type of thing is done on pretty much EVERY SINGLE PAGE, and it really builds up and kills the joy. I guess it\\\'s just the GrammarNazi in me, but I know for a fact that I\\\'m not the only one.
Probably the worst one I saw was an entry involving a bear (can\\\'t remember the page now), where the word \\\"barely\\\" was potholed. Had it been played with and made into \\\"[=BEARly,=]\\\" I might have laughed a little and left it alone, as it would have worked. But no. A similarly-spelled but contextually-appropriate word is apparently a pun now. Again, the omnipresence of this kind of fail is what makes it matter.
Probably the worst one I saw was an entry involving a bear (can\\\'t remember the page now), where the word \\\"barely\\\" was potholed. Had it been played with and made into \\\"[=BEARly,=]\\\" I might have laughed a little and left it alone, as it would have worked. But no. A similarly-spelled but contextually-appropriate word is apparently a pun now. Again, the omnipresence of this kind of fail is what makes it matter.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
An example: ScoringPoints, near the bottom, the entry for \
to:
An example: ScoringPoints, near the bottom, the entry for \\\"Nomic.\\\" The word \\\"point\\\" is used in-context. And yet it\\\'s marked as a pun. It\\\'s minor by itself, yes, but this exact type of thing is done on pretty much EVERY SINGLE PAGE, and it really builds up and kills the joy. I guess it\\\'s just the GrammarNazi in me, but I know for a fact that I\\\'m not the only one.
Probably the worst one I saw was an entry involving a bear (can\\\'t remember the page now), where the word \\\"barely\\\" was potholed. Had it been played with and made into \\\"BEARly,\\\" I might have laughed a little and left it alone, as it would have worked. But no. A similarly-spelled but contextually-appropriate word is apparently a pun now. Again, the omnipresence of this kind of fail is what makes it matter.
Probably the worst one I saw was an entry involving a bear (can\\\'t remember the page now), where the word \\\"barely\\\" was potholed. Had it been played with and made into \\\"BEARly,\\\" I might have laughed a little and left it alone, as it would have worked. But no. A similarly-spelled but contextually-appropriate word is apparently a pun now. Again, the omnipresence of this kind of fail is what makes it matter.
