Besides that, I don't understand your first paragraph, what you're trying to say, why you mention the phrase on its own. I had a similar feeling reading your initial comment - no idea why you would say that. I'm missing something, not sure what. "Since a lot of people don't read the article, we don't need the rule against saying 'Did you read the article?'" makes no sense to me as a piece of reasoning. The conclusion of the argument seems to have nothing to do with the premise(s). Whether 0%, 50% or 100% of people read the article would make no difference to the value of that rule, seems to me.