Revision as of 13:07, 31 August 2021 editHerostratus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers53,215 edits →Call for voluntary userfication: oof dang i messed up, fix up← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:18, 31 August 2021 edit undoHerostratus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers53,215 edits →Call for voluntary userfication: alsoNext edit → | ||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
So, in addition to your no-doubt desire to be consistent and fair-minded on these matters, I'm sure you want to avoid more time and energy wasting fuddle-do-do of more worrying over the page, so, thanking you in advance for your understanding, ] (]) 06:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | So, in addition to your no-doubt desire to be consistent and fair-minded on these matters, I'm sure you want to avoid more time and energy wasting fuddle-do-do of more worrying over the page, so, thanking you in advance for your understanding, ] (]) 06:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Handy link to see the community consensus: ]. ] (]) 07:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | :Handy link to see the community consensus: ]. ] (]) 07:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | ||
::Right. I had looked at the wrong close, the one for the first nomination some years back. Sorry, and the points re the close don't apply nearly so strongly and are not germane. The rest stands as this isn't about any votes but about the best thing to do in this difficult situation. ] (]) |
::Right. I had looked at the wrong close, the one for the first nomination some years back. Sorry, and the points re the discussion and close don't apply nearly so strongly and are not germane. The rest stands as this isn't about any votes but about the best thing to do in this difficult situation. (As to consensus, these things are not a vote, and if you disregard the "this doesn't bother me, so it couldn't bother anyone else and even if it did who cares" type arguments (which would maybe be justifiable I think) I'm not sure there would be a clear consensus either way; no way to know since the close was more on procedural and deportment grounds rather than the merits it looks like). ] (]) 13:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | ||
] (]) 12:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | |||
:{{Re|Herostratus}} You should know that the "original writer" of a page doesn't get any special ] over it, especially once there are other contributors. — ] <sup>]</sup> 10:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | :{{Re|Herostratus}} You should know that the "original writer" of a page doesn't get any special ] over it, especially once there are other contributors. — ] <sup>]</sup> 10:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | ||
::Maybe. Depends on the circumstances. This is rather a special case I think and this is the best way forward, so per ] we can find precedents I'm confident. ] (]) 12:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC) | ::Maybe. Depends on the circumstances. This is rather a special case I think and this is the best way forward, so per ] we can find precedents I'm confident. ] (]) 12:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:18, 31 August 2021
This project page was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This page has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
Misplaced Pages essays Mid‑impact | ||||||||||
|
Archives | |||
|
|||
Overzealous archiving
User:Beeblebrox, please do not archive so as to leave zero threads. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:09, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
- If that's a rule, it's not one I've ever heard of. The most recent talk thread was over three years old, I don't see anything overzealous about archiving it. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's not a rule. In fact, it is common for obscure essays and other pages like this to be empty to discourage me-too forum comments. Johnuniq (talk) 22:38, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
- Interesting point, Johnuniq. I am aware of the argument that article talk pages should not be emptied because it discourages new talk page posts. Old talk sections provide an encouraging example for newcomer editors in posting a talk thread. I hadn't considered that it might be a good idea to discourage newcomers from posting on essay talk pages. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think the fear of me-too forums is unfounded. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting point, Johnuniq. I am aware of the argument that article talk pages should not be emptied because it discourages new talk page posts. Old talk sections provide an encouraging example for newcomer editors in posting a talk thread. I hadn't considered that it might be a good idea to discourage newcomers from posting on essay talk pages. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's not a rule. In fact, it is common for obscure essays and other pages like this to be empty to discourage me-too forum comments. Johnuniq (talk) 22:38, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Use of "Hangman" graphic
Good morning all.
I removed the "Hangman" graphic primarily because of the racist connotation to lynchings in the southern United States. Other editors might disagree, but I was also motivated by the fact that the graphic precisely does not illustrate the topic: "Give 'em enough rope" - since the point of the graphic is to illustrate someone being hung; and the point of the topic is to encourage people being allowed to (metaphorically) hang themselves.
My edit was reverted so I have brought it here.
If the graphic is relevant to the topic and adds value to the article then of course it should stay. Views please. Regards and respect to all, Springnuts (talk) 09:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- The graphic is clearly a reference to Hangman (game). Something that I played at school as a child. I don't think that it has any specfic connations to "lynching". Hanging via a rope has been a very common method of execution since the middle ages, and has no strong connotations particular to "lynchings in the southern United States" over any other usage of hanging. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- This. It's a kids game. It does not depict a lynching. It's perhaps a bit grim for a children's activity but I've never seen any evidence that it is supposed to depict a lynching as opposed to the literally hundreds of other scenarios in which people were hung. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you. I note that there is not a consensus that it constitutes a racist meme and have struck through the point above. Any views on the relevance issue (imposed v self-inflicted death) please? Springnuts (talk) 21:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- The stick man is a rather lonely figure. He has no lynchers. He has no visible hangman. It's somewhat unclear if he's black or white. In fact he has no skin. The only crime or non-crime he ever commits is invented by the players who allow him to be created. But it seems to me that anyone who's already at the noose, and has to have each of his (or her) limbs created and attached, one by one, is hardy likely to be in charge of the rope. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you. I note that there is not a consensus that it constitutes a racist meme and have struck through the point above. Any views on the relevance issue (imposed v self-inflicted death) please? Springnuts (talk) 21:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- This. It's a kids game. It does not depict a lynching. It's perhaps a bit grim for a children's activity but I've never seen any evidence that it is supposed to depict a lynching as opposed to the literally hundreds of other scenarios in which people were hung. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Apologies for late homework - there is some relevant discussion here ] and here ]. Springnuts (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- And in the two move discussions,all of which are linked at the top of the page. I get it though,people tend to scroll right past that stuff. The graphic obviously does not literally show someone being given a rope,rather it shows a player on the brink of losing a game of hangman, similar to a user who, having been unblocked, starts back up the same behavior that led to the block, one wrong move, and they are done, as the caption says. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well fair enough. And I guess there's a sprinkling of I just don't like it involved, which is of no weight whatsoever of course. I will have a look for something more relevant and suitable, and if I can find it, will perhaps give it a whirl. Respect to all, Springnuts (talk) 08:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Trying a photo showing the creation of a noose. Springnuts (talk) 10:25, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
- I certainly do not see that as an improvement. Where before we had an image of a children's game, there is now an actual noose. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
- I think these are all efforts at making superficial improvements on a what is the fundamentally unavoidable core metaphor of this essay, as it is written. We need to address the core problem here. Some effort were made in 2015 and 2016, but they met with strong opposition, which even spilled out into a successful effort to quash the alternative essay that spelt out the same principle with more decency. Five years have passed now, and I would like to think the community will have grown up in the meantime. Maybe it's time to show we're ready to start treating people with the sensitivity they deserve? – Uanfala (talk) 17:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm just going to say what I say every time this comes up: if you think a different metaphor would be better write that essay. If it's better, it will supplant this one. I agree that times can change, essays like WP:BALLS used to be commonly cited in conversations, but not so much anymore, not because they were watered down but because they were replaced with better essays. Anyone is perfectly free to write such an essay, and I encourage them to link it here in the "see also" section. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Good photo, thanks. Springnuts (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Call for voluntary userfication
Hi User:Beeblebrox. As the original writer of this page, I'm calling on you to userfy it, thanks. Since you've in the past demonstrated a high standard for what sorts of essays are proper for Wikispace and which are proper for userspace instead (and fine, as long as one is consistent), and since this page is controversial, I'm confident you'll do the right thing here.
Herostratus (talk) (later)
We know it's controversial because it's been nominated for deletion three times and surely will be again. Which stands to reason because it's not a good page for Wikispace.
I mean the point of this page is legitimate: accept a blocked editor at her word, but recognize that there're all kinds of people out there, and she may fall short of her promise, or even be devious, in which case sadly we must require her to apply her talents elsewhere. That's pretty obvious, but it's OK to say it. But not like this, that's all we're saying. (This is also why the usual relief of writing and linking to a refuting essay isn't on the table -- we agree with the point, it's the existence of the wording we're not so sure about.)
We know all this was written (and written well) in good faith, there's no hint of accusation there. It's just that some of us have different experiences in life, and here, and so we don't agree with the terminology, and we think that ascribing this to the original author alone would be in order here.
So, in addition to your no-doubt desire to be consistent and fair-minded on these matters, I'm sure you want to avoid more time and energy wasting fuddle-do-do of more worrying over the page, so, thanking you in advance for your understanding, Herostratus (talk) 06:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- Handy link to see the community consensus: Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Give 'em enough rope (3rd nomination). Johnuniq (talk) 07:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- Right. I had looked at the wrong close, the one for the first nomination some years back. Sorry, and the points re the discussion and close don't apply nearly so strongly and are not germane. The rest stands as this isn't about any votes but about the best thing to do in this difficult situation. (As to consensus, these things are not a vote, and if you disregard the "this doesn't bother me, so it couldn't bother anyone else and even if it did who cares" type arguments (which would maybe be justifiable I think) I'm not sure there would be a clear consensus either way; no way to know since the close was more on procedural and deportment grounds rather than the merits it looks like). Herostratus (talk) 13:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Herostratus (talk) 12:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Herostratus: You should know that the "original writer" of a page doesn't get any special authority over it, especially once there are other contributors. — xaosflux 10:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe. Depends on the circumstances. This is rather a special case I think and this is the best way forward, so per WP:1Q we can find precedents I'm confident. Herostratus (talk) 12:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)