Frank, hasn't Sarah taught you anything. Your now going to be blamed no matter what!

One of our suppliers were nice enough to adulterate a few batches of the raw material with wood. We of course asked them to figure out where and what the wood was from. They traced it back to a scraper handle that fell into their equipment.

As part of the investigation write-up they included the Wikipedia article on the types of wood used by their scraper supplier to back up a key point of the explaination of no harm due to the contamination.

The powers that be here were NOT amused by the probability that we would have to defend the use of wikipedia as a reference in an official investigation to the FDA.

I frequently get into online arguments with people who cite Wikipedia as an authoritative source. My response is usually, "If Wikipedia is the best you can do to source your argument, you have no real source."

If I want to know on which episode of The Simpsons, Homer said, "mmmm. sacrilicious," I go to Wikipedia. If I want to know the order of Presidents of the United States, Wikipedia is a nice backup.

If, however, I want to know anything so obscure that it requires an Internet search, Wikipedia is a little better than Google, in that I can, possibly, find authoritative source material.

I think Wikipedia is a little better than "some guy." It's really "a bunch of guys."

The biggest problem with Wikipedia? It's what I call "fact by consensus." If you can convince enough people that something is true, it becomes true on Wikipedia.

I...MISSED...SEEING...MM...AND...KP...ON...TV......TOGETHER!!!!!

{gnashing of teeth and rending of clothes!}

Yeah, I'm a terrible source. I admit it.

Unlike, say, Reuters or the AP.

Dont be hard on Cadet Happy for not reading other blogs. The only blog I need to read is IMAO. Why would I want to read anything else?

//...and will just spout more unsubstantiated theories...//

Here's one: you're Franked in the head.

Dont be hard on Cadet Happy for not reading other blogs. The only blog I need to read is IMAO.

There's no evidence he reads that either.

"spout more unsubstantiated theories"

I didn't watch the show or even hear about it before now, but my guess is that Sean Hanity put the whole thing together. During the show there was probably a fund raiser for the troops and then a chimpanzee on rollerskates came out on stage. Now, of course, I must go put this stuff on wikipedia.

we received actual evidence this weekend that Cadet Happy doesn't read IMAO. ever. or blog on it. we pay him to watch reality TV shows, apparently.

i thought the show would have been better if it had included blogs. they mentioned about 5 blogs by name, and everything else was "a blogger did this" and "a blogger did that" and very vague. i thought it was weird and confusing and pretty disjointed. i really wanted it to work, i wanted to like it. because even though i hate to admit it (don't tell anyone), i like both of those girls (now STOP TALKING ABOUT MICHELLE MALKIN!).

they both looked better than Gwyneth Paltrow in her Oscar dress, though.

and the mystery blogger bit was kinda weird. why have a mystery blogger if you're just going to reveal him at the end of the episode? if you emailed in who it was and got it right, was there a prize?

Shorter skirts for Michelle is all I want out of next weeks episode!!

I used to dream of to being a mystery blogger until I realized I already was one.

Dude, I just read their defense against the wild, baseless accusations of the Gorinator's energy "hypocrisy". Yes, it is true that the GoreHouse uses much more electricity than the average Christianista - HOWEVER, that's only because the Goretasm has a much larger house than all you losers, so he needs the energy to make it all work. SEE??? It's all just a conservative Reich-wing-nut conspiracy!