22:
73:
What galls me is that if someone else wrote an
Ambition page—as would have happened by now, anyway—no one would care. Yet because the inventor himself participates in the process, he gets accused of self-promotion in a strictly negative sense.
67:
was to quote directly from the official rules of some card game, so I quoted from my own, a valid choice. That alone justifies inclusion, at least of that bit of material. It's high-quality content. What can I say? I'm not
49:
an appropriate vehicle for advertising. Including a on-year-old invented game in an article where the only other examples are spades, hearts, pinochle, and bridge would qualify as advertising as far as I'm concerned.
46:
29:
91:
75:
51:
85:
58:
You are factually incorrect. Advertising requires commercial or political purpose.
63:
The best way I could see of summing up one aspect of this concept
15:
65:(revoke as not a strategic option but tantamount to cheating)
28:
This article has not yet been rated on
Knowledge (XXG)'s
8:
21:
19:
7:
14:
20:
1:
108:
54:08:50, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
78:16:43, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
47:Knowledge (XXG) is not
92:Unassessed articles
30:content assessment
36:
35:
99:
25:
24:
23:
16:
107:
106:
102:
101:
100:
98:
97:
96:
82:
81:
44:
12:
11:
5:
105:
103:
95:
94:
84:
83:
80:
79:
70:
69:
60:
59:
43:
40:
34:
33:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
104:
93:
90:
89:
87:
77:
72:
71:
68:unarticulate.
66:
62:
61:
57:
56:
55:
53:
48:
41:
39:
31:
27:
18:
17:
64:
45:
37:
76:Mike Church
42:Advertising
52:Isomorphic
86:Category
38:{{WPCB
32:scale.
88::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.