On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Matthew Brown<mor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Magnus > Manske<magnusman...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> Come to think of it: >> >> The bible is either wrong, in which case it shouldn't be cited. >> >> Or it's true, which would mean that it was dictated by God himself. >> Wouldn't that make it original research? > > The Bible is a well-known ancient work with great cultural > significance. Its status as fiction or fact is almost beside the > point. It is accurate about what it itself says, which can be cited > as appropriate to inform articles where what it said was/is relevant. > > (And I know I'm taking a joking suggestion seriously, prolonging the joke!)
You're right. To atone for my sins, here the auto-comparing toolserver tool I hacked since my first mail: http://toolserver.org/~magnus/biblebay.php?bookname=John&range=3%3A16-3%3A18 Magnus _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l