![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Should be better integrated with the definite description article (which currently doesn't link to this one). AnonMoos ( talk) 12:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Lots of languages make a narrow and wide distinction in "to be," just not English, apparently.-- Levalley ( talk) 00:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
My brain locked up. In what sense does Pegasus not exist?? We have a whole WP article on something that doesn't exist? There's something very fundamentally flawed with this article... it needs some major re-write.
The entire first section, about Pegasus, Odysseus and Aristotle, is utter blarny-stone, some kind of crapola written by someone high on pot. WTF!? This whole thing stinks of a put-on or forgery or a test to see if wikipedia is full-of-crap type experiment...
Just to be clear: although Pegasus was never composed of physical, quantum-mechanical atoms, clearly, Pegasus exists in the noosphere, as otherwise we would not have an article on him. The name "Pegasus" is a referent to the vast network of writing containing the word "Pegasus". Thus, clearly, the "name" Pegasus clearly refers to something. So is this article about:
I strongly suspect this article is about the latter option, about "something else", but the confounding factors of what it means to "exist" and to "name", means that most of this article is an un-interperable word salad of vague, undefined terms; some poetic allusion to some vague concept... linas ( talk) 16:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Should be better integrated with the definite description article (which currently doesn't link to this one). AnonMoos ( talk) 12:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Lots of languages make a narrow and wide distinction in "to be," just not English, apparently.-- Levalley ( talk) 00:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
My brain locked up. In what sense does Pegasus not exist?? We have a whole WP article on something that doesn't exist? There's something very fundamentally flawed with this article... it needs some major re-write.
The entire first section, about Pegasus, Odysseus and Aristotle, is utter blarny-stone, some kind of crapola written by someone high on pot. WTF!? This whole thing stinks of a put-on or forgery or a test to see if wikipedia is full-of-crap type experiment...
Just to be clear: although Pegasus was never composed of physical, quantum-mechanical atoms, clearly, Pegasus exists in the noosphere, as otherwise we would not have an article on him. The name "Pegasus" is a referent to the vast network of writing containing the word "Pegasus". Thus, clearly, the "name" Pegasus clearly refers to something. So is this article about:
I strongly suspect this article is about the latter option, about "something else", but the confounding factors of what it means to "exist" and to "name", means that most of this article is an un-interperable word salad of vague, undefined terms; some poetic allusion to some vague concept... linas ( talk) 16:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)