Re: Is 'comparative linguistics' just a genocidal 'scientific' joke?

On Nov 9, 5:55 pm, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1194647206.140630.237...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

LINGUIST List has been spearheading a project to get legitimate
information on linguistic topics into wikipedia, but that doesn't mean
it will stay there. Someone in Cambridge, England, changed
"Reformation Symphony" to "Deformation Symphony" in the entry on Felix
Mendelssohn, and also asserted that the Reformation Symphony is a
forgery. The former was corrected within hours, the latter not until
someone inquired about it at rec.music.classical five months later.

Printed references are not immune to such errors, either intentional
("esquivalience") or unintentional ("dord").

I don't know what the first one is (a device for trapping
plagiarists?), but are errors in printed references generally
malicious in intent?

.