QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 22nd December 2010, 10:08pm)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
I would be surprised that any wp user named
clusterflockÂ
(T-C-L-K-R-D)
would get away with it.
But Wikipedia is not censored!
Using the "revision history statistics", we see that "Parking Chair" it comes as little surprise that it is is essentially the creation of a single user, one
SebwiteÂ
(T-C-L-K-R-D)
, an individual who claims to be a vegetarian, a Scorpio, and likes to collect quarters.
The article is another example of excessive inclusionism, including pretentious analysis that smells of that there Original Research. Lots of MSM and web references (blogs?!), puffing it up to avoid summary deletion. The reason is pretty clear: you could reduce the article to a single sentence with no change to the amount of knowledge gathered by humanity. Once there, moving to Wiktionary or something is a no-brainer.
Question: suppose you are in Pittsburgh, and you are on some residential street with all these chairs on the road. Since you've never heard of this "parking chair" notion, it looks very surreal and strange. So, to answer the obvious question, you reach for your iPhone and enter ... what? I'd say most people would be hard-pressed to dig this out of the 'net. If you do enter the "right" query, it effectively answers the question!
You would almost certainly do better to just ask someone walking by. Which may highlight the point here: how much of the "sum of human knowledge" is this kind of idiosyncratic stuff, highly specific to a locality? Being useless anywhere else on Earth, it makes it a poor candidate for inclusion in a general encyclopedia. At best one may argue for its inclusion in the Sum of All Knowledge in the City of Pittsburgh, and maybe only certain streets at that.