[WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

[George Herbert]

On 7/13/06, stevertigo <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > It's quite another to assert that military operation  names are
> > unencyclopedic or so POV that they should not be used in the WP.  The
> > operation names are just designators for an event, and are often both
> > the most common and only popularly known public label for those events
> > (Desert Storm, for example).
>
> Again "most common", "most known" etc. are not significant points.
> The 2003 Invasion of Iraq article for example, according to your view,
> should be called "Operation Iraqi Freedom."

Actually, no.  I think it should be called the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.
You're overgeneralizing my position.

If the military operation name is the most common western, english
language designation for an event ("Desert Storm") then it probably
should be the article name.

If the military operation name is not the most common western, english
language description for the event ("2003 Invasion of Iraq") then it
should not use the military operation name.  The military operation
name should exist as a redirect to the event article, in that case.

It's a western-english-culture-centric approach, not a pro military or
anti-military terminology approach.  The article should be named the
way "normal people" will most likely look for the article.  In some
cases that is, and in some cases that is not, the military operation
name.

> > It is possible to take Robin Lakoff too seriously.
>
> I dont read him/her.

Robin Lakoff is the wife of UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff; both
of whom have been writing widely on linguistics of military and
political actions, from a left-wing viewpoint, for about 20 years now.
 Your argument may be of independent origin but it's precisely some of
their points.  See [[George Lakoff]] on en.wikipedia

>Its also possible to take the Pentagon too seriously too.

Of course.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com