User talk:Monopolymansion

Your edit to decade was not consistent with what was being described in the rest of the paragraph. The 2000-2009 decade is a valid interpretation but is described in the 2nd paragraph, not the 3rd. The description in the 3rd paragraph is for the very rarely used ordinal decades. Practically speaking, no one says "201st decade" (unlike "21st century") but this is there nonetheless to explain the opposing point of view. The opposing views exist since there is no strict definition of when a decade needs to start (see 4th paragraph, 1995-2004 is also a decade). Wikipedia must be neutral. All points of view are presented. The concluding sentence effectively implores people to use common sense when trying to decide whether you're dealing with someone who's meaning 2000-2009 or 2001-2010 or something else (e.g. 1995-2004). --96.49.103.254 (talk) 18:56, 23 December 2009 (UTC)