[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia article on [[Santorum (neologism)]]

[George Herbert]

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Thu, 26/5/11, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com>
>>
>> > From: George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com>
>
>> > I don't agree with either statement.
>> >
>> > The event (Savage coming up with the term, the effects
>> on
>> > Santorum) is
>> > notable.  It's covered in reliable sources.  The
>> > word itself would be
>> > a Wiktionary entry, but the incident overall is
>> Wikipedia.
>> >
>> > We're reporting on the damage to Santorum, not
>> causing
>> > it.  Our
>> > reporting is not making it better, but neither is it
>> making
>> > it worse.
>> > The damage was done by Savage and others and was
>> widespread
>> > long
>> > before the article here.
>> >
>> > We do not censor topics that are damaging to
>> individuals
>> > just because
>> > they are damaging.  They have to be notable and
>> > covered in a NPOV way
>> > for us to cover them, but this passes both tests.
>>
>>
>> You may be forgetting that we have an article on [[Santorum
>> controversy
>> regarding homosexuality]]. That's notable. The term,
>> linguistically, is not.
>> It's in one slang dictionary, and one book on neologisms.
>
>
> As a matter of fact, it would help Wikipedia if the article were retitled,
> [[Dan Savage Google-bomb campaign against Rick Santorum]].

The Santorum controversy...  article has 2 sentences on Savage and the
neologism, no coverage of the consequences on Santorum's career,
Santorum's comments regarding it, or critical or academic coverage of
the incident.

That by itself approximates sweeping it under the rug, which will not fly.

If you want to propose a content merge of those two articles that's
not grossly offensive to my sensibilities, as long as it actually
merges the content and is not an excuse to delete one of the two
articles.

Retitling might not be a bad idea if it lessens the google focus.
That's not grossly offensive to my sensibilities.  Not sure that it
would actually work.


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