And how exactly is "pedophilia advocacy" not
some neologistic term itself?
"Pedophile advocacy" is no more a neologism than "Opposition to the war in
Iraq". It's simply the compilation of accepted terms into a descriptive phrase.
The neologism in "childlove movement" is the term "childlove" which
exists in no standard dictionary and is not used by any mainstream sources. The term
"pedophile" is well established as is the word "advocacy".
"Childlove movement" is the name by which
they refer to themselves
That's insufficient for NPOV, indeed to use a term simply because a particular group
uses it is very POV. We should not use a euphemism simply because advocates prefer it. If
we did we'd be referring to "white nationalists" rather than "white
supremacists", "Racial rationalists" rather than "racists",
"Historical revisionists" rather than "Holocaust deniers".
and subsequently how they are referred to by others.
That statement is based on a false premise. It is simply not the case that a group of
people is automatically referred to by the name they give themselves (see my earlier
argument about "white nationalists"). Secondly, we have no evidence that this is
the case with the pedophile movement. Lexis/Nexis shows no occurances of the term
"childlove" in published media reports.
Anyway, another editor has moved the article to "pedophile advocacy" based on
consensus in the AFD so now the discussion should shift to the contents of the article
itself.
Homey
>
> From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com>
> Date: 2006/01/01 Sun AM 06:28:56 EST
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Article: Childlove movement
>
And how exactly is "pedophilia advocacy" not
some neologistic term itself?
> "Childlove movement" is the name by
which they refer to themselves and
> subsequently how they are referred to by others.
>
> Mgm
>
>
> On 12/31/05, homey2005(a)sympatico.ca <homey2005(a)sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >
> > "Childlove movement" is a POV euphemism for pedophilia advocacy. There
is
> > currently and AFD on the article at
> >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Childlove_move…, we
have a small number of pedophilia advocates (self-identified on
> > their user pages) who have been editing pedophilia related articles in an
> > attempt to promote their POV.
> >
> > What this means is there may not be "consensus" at the AFD to take
action
> > such as deleting, merging or renaming the article. However, I think it's
> > quite clear that the name of the article at least is POV.
> >
> > Just as we would not allow a small group of dedicated anti-Semities to
> > maintain an article title such as "Holohoax" we shouldn't allow a
small
> > group of pedophiles to use wikipedia to promote their preferred terminology
> > of "childlover".
> >
> > Any ideas as to how we should handle this? If a small group of dedicated
> > advocates can block consensus that is a serious threat to our NPOV policy.
> >
> > Homey
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> >
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>