Talk:There's a sucker born every minute/Archives/2014
 | This is an archive of past discussions about There's a sucker born every minute. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
"every minute" portion
I wonder if this comes from the statistical rate of growth of the population at the time the phrase was first used: in other words, it was saying, given that the world birth rate was one per minute (which maybe was true in the 19th century) that everyone is a sucker.--Jrm2007 (talk) 10:27, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Untitled
Linked to from ESPN Page2: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=lukas/050630&num=3 (Why they needed a link for this phrase, I have no idea.)
- I have nothing to contribute to this page, however I thought it was funny that when I searched for "Every 10 Minutes" for information on Pepsi's XBox 360 giveaway sweepstakes this wiki was the first result. I wonder if Pepsi's board had a laugh about this aptly named (and very popular) sweepstakes
- I bumped into this page while researching an article that I'm writing about Adam Forepaugh. I gave it a pretty good re-writing. I found several sources for the Forepaugh angle, most notably http://www.bartleby.com/66/19/5619.html. Joe 19:44, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
--- Nice work, Joe! It is now an entertaining and interesting article. I'm glad that closer to Wiki's quality standards, so should survive any other attempt at deletion. The phrase is very well known, so it merits an article, and a discussion of the mis-attribution to Barnum. Javaman59 (talk) 03:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- Found this story that has no references of its own, but might merit consideration or further research... http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html 05:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.64.42 (talk)
- This is not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards. I see that someone copy-pasted the whole thing into the article, which is clearly a copyright violation (no authorization to copy) and plagiarism (no source given), so I have removed it. --Macrakis (talk) 00:30, 28 January 2012 (UTC)