I've dropped Cirt a note and link to this thread, in case they weren't aware of it.
As mentioned before, what is at the root of this is a wider problem though: to what extent we as a project are happy to act as participants, rather than neutral observers and reporters, in the political process.
I'd say that neutrality is our best bet here, as anything else is likely to come back to us eventually. We should not make *undue* efforts to promote political or social campaigns.
There is little in present policy to address this. WP:Activist is an essay.
Andreas
--- On Wed, 25/5/11, WereSpielChequers werespielchequers@gmail.com wrote:
From: WereSpielChequers werespielchequers@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia article on [[Santorum (neologism)]] To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 25 May, 2011, 20:21 I'm not surprised that a Wikipedia article shoots to the top of Google searches, isn't that one of the reasons why we write here? I'm pretty sure I've seen Wikipedia articles come top on Google even if they lack templates and are practically orphans.
Nor am I surprised that someone who writes an article then goes and creates associated templates. I don't do much with templates but I have a similar editing pattern - I was in the British Museum for the Hoxne Hoard challenge and wound up contributing a number of edits to articles about the sorts of spoons that were in the hoard.
I am concerned at the risk of the mailing list degenerating into some sort of back channel and disrupting the wiki. People using it for off wiki complaints about an AFD and criticism of individual wikipedians who may not be subscribing to this list is in my view unhealthy.
Have any of the people expressing disquiet about that editor notified them of this thread?
WereSpielChequers
On 25 May 2011 19:51, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 25/5/11, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com
wrote:
Let's just delete articles we don't like. It would simplify the wikilawyering.
You see, I question whether if fulfils any
encyclopedic (rather than
Googlebombing) purpose to list "santorum" in a nav
template of 100 political neologisms, and you come back with quips like that, and accuse people of
wikilawyering (while exhorting me to Assume Good
Faith, in capital letters:
"You are ascribing motive to Cirt's activities. Assume
Good Faith.").
Incidentally, I just noticed the following
conversation on the political
neologisms template's talk page:
---o0o---
==Shouldn't this be a category?==
I'm not sure what the purpose of this is. Why would
anyone looking at (say)
Euroscepticism want to navigate to an article about
Soccer mom? Surely, this
is why categories were invented. Bastin 08:46, 11 May
2011 (UTC)
:It is most useful as a template. And yes, linguists
and political scholars
would indeed wish to navigate through these articles.
-- Cirt (talk) 08:47,
11 May 2011 (UTC)
::They're completely unrelated terms. Why would you
have a template on
'words invented since 1973'? Bastin 09:31, 11 May 2011
(UTC)
:::Because they are of interest to those studying the
subject matter from
the perspective of many different varied fields. --
Cirt (talk) 15:27, 11
May 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Political_neologisms
---o0o---
"Most useful". A category doesn't add any in-bound
links. And that was the
end of that conversation.
Andreas
On 5/25/11, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 25/5/11, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net
wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net
I don't want to get that clever, to the
point that
we take
into account that even talking about the article on
this list
might
affect ranking. What is needed is to improve the article;
it is
about a
political act, not about lube.
If it's about the political act, it should be
covered
under [[Santorum
controversy regarding homosexuality]].
Linguistically -- the term has been included
in one
dictionary, and in one
book on neologisms. Some erotic books have
used it
(and we have gleefully
included full quotes from each in the
article's
references:
"She wads up the t-shirt, uses it to wipe a
trickle of
santorum from her
ass, and throws it under the cot."
"Mark fucked his wife with slow, sure strokes
that
seemed to the panting
Valerie to penetrate her more deeply than
ever before.
At each descent of
the pouncing big prick into her sanctum
santorum,
Valerie thrust upward with
all her strength until the velvety surfaces
of her
rotund naked buttocks
swung clear of the bed"
"Then, one of them broke ranks and rammed
his
blood-lubed fist straight up
my ass and twisted hard, pulled it out and
licked the
santorum clean.")
Is that enough for linguistic notability?
Perhaps
enough for a Wiktionary
entry, but a whole article, on bona-fide
*linguistic*,
encyclopedic grounds?
As for the template use:
Including the term in *both* the sexual slang
template
and the political
neologisms template, both custom-created for
the
occasion, seems a stretch
to me.
It is not a "political neologism", rightfully
listed
along with terms like
Adopt a Highway • Afrocentrism • "And"
theory of
conservatism • Big
government • Chairman • Checkbook
diplomacy •
Children's interests •
Collaborationism • Conviction politics •
Cordon
sanitaire • Cricket test •
Democide • Dhimmitude • Eco-terrorism
•
Epistemocracy • Eurocentrism •
Eurorealism • Euroscepticism • Eurosphere
•
Failed state • etc.
in a 100-term template, causing it to appear
in all of
those articles.
Listing it in the sexual slang template,
based on less
than a dozen
appearances in print as an actual word -- as
opposed
to reporting about
Dan Savage's campaign -- is a closer call,
but still
debatable.
I don't like Santorum either, and sorry to be
a
spoil-sport, but it's
unworthy of Wikipedia.
Andreas
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
visit:
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l