These are people with whom you simply can't reason. Any argument you provide will be shot down with the absurdest of reasons.
Personally, I'm glad this happened to me. Like you, that experience cemented the unreliability of wikipedia in my mind.
These are people with whom you simply can't reason. Any argument you provide will be shot down with the absurdest of reasons.
Personally, I'm glad this happened to me. Like you, that experience cemented the unreliability of wikipedia in my mind.
I apologize, but I’m a little unclear on what you’re asking for. Let me know and I’m happy to provide.
Unfortunately it doesn’t seem to be the case, specifically with talk pages where the history of the discussion with the editor who deemed it a “hoax” was, but you can see some remnants of it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Random_Hacks_of_K...
I wasn’t the one who made the edits to the page itself, but I was involved in collecting the links to prove it wasn’t a “hoax” and helping make the case to the editor who refused to believe it was true.