| Revision as of 22:37, 15 January 2007 editElaragirl (talk | contribs)3,865 edits →Can we please just be adults, eh?← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 22:31, 23 September 2024 edit undoTom.Reding (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Template editors3,815,464 editsm WikiProject banner(s) moved/merged into {{WikiProject banner shell}} (Essays); cleanupTag: AWB |
| (369 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
{{oldmfdfull |
|
|
|
{{Censor}} |
|
| date = 2007-01-15 |
|
|
|
{{Talk header|search=yes}} |
|
| result = ''speedy keep'' |
|
|
|
{{Old XfD multi |
|
| page = Misplaced Pages:Don't-give-a-fuckism |
|
|
|
| date = January 14, 2007 |
|
|
| result = '''Speedy Keep''' |
|
|
| link = http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism |
|
|
| date2 = September 5, 2008 |
|
|
| result2 = '''Speedy Keep''' |
|
|
| link2 = http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism_(second_nomination) |
|
|
| date3 = August 31, 2010 |
|
|
| result3 = '''] Keep''' |
|
|
| link3 = http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism_(3rd_nomination) |
|
|
| date4 = September 25, 2010 |
|
|
| result4 = '''Keep''' |
|
|
| link4 = http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism_(4th_nomination) |
|
|
| date5 = January 20, 2014 |
|
|
| result5 = '''Keep''' |
|
|
| link5 = https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism_(5th_nomination) |
|
|
| numbered = yes |
|
|
| collapse = yes |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell| |
|
Oh God... I wasn't expepecting that userbox.. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing. --''']]''' 19:57, 21 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Department of Fun}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Essays|importance=top}} |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
==Quick poll== |
|
|
|
{{Archive basics |
|
|
|
|
|
|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Don't-give-a-fuckism /Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
|
|
|
|counter = 4 |
|
'''Support:''' |
|
|
|
|headerlevel = 2 |
|
* Give a fuck, but only by choice, and only when there's a stake. — ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small>/<small><sub>]</sub></small> 01:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
* To me, it means not taking the actions of other users personally, and I'm all for that. <font color="silver">-</font><font color="silver">-</font> '''] <sup>]</sup><sup><font color="silver">|</font></sup><sup>]</sup>''' <font color="silver">-</font><font color="silver">-</font> 05:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
}} |
|
* I support this article (for the most part). --] 16:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{Archives|auto=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
'''Oppose:''' |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
'''Meh:''' |
|
|
*''']]''' 20:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
*Could care less. ]<sub>]</sub> 01:17, 7 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
*Don't give a fuck. — ] <font color="#000088"><sup>]</sup>'''/'''<sub>]</sub></font></span> 23:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Strong Whatever''' ] 03:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Strong supp—I'm bored now'''. -] <small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small> 17:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Rudeness == |
|
|
|
|
|
This page has to be renamed to reflect politeness.--10:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Who the fuck gives a fuck about fucking politeness? Besides, ]. o''']'''r''']''' <sub>(])</sub> 06:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
*Rewording indecent language is not censorship.--08:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:It was created as ] and it will stay that way. o''']'''r''']''' <sub>(])</sub> 09:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I'm fine with changing the name... but I think the "fuck" sort of embodies the entire idea behind the ism. But yeah... I don't really care. --''']]''' 14:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm outraged and offended at the rudeness behind this article. PROD ahoy! ;D--] 23:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care how offended people are by the title, but it seems that the title could be more accurate. ''Don't-give-a-fuckism'' seems to be a title for sensationalism instead of accuracy. A more correct title would be ''Apathetic Philosophy'' or something along those lines. Don't-give-a-fuckism should be talked about inside the article (i.e. an alternate phrasing). I like the article, but I think it needs to be edited to sound like a serious article. --] 16:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:IMHO it doesn't need to be censored (make the title more palatable to sensitivities) to be "serious." Its irreverence '''is the point.''' ] don't have to, 'cause we DGAF. See? But if the title is keeping the thing in a rut, maybe "Ambiable Apathy" or "Irreverent Apathy" (see my userbox mod below) is more your (plural) cuppa tea? ] (<big><font color="darkred">] ] ]</font></big>) 21:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::I agree it doesn't need to be censored, at least not simply because it offends people or uses course language. I'm starting to see that it might not hold the same weight or meaning if the title is changed. It felt inaccurate at first, but going through it again, the suggested apathy is obvious in the actual article and the creation of an ism for it is a fairly good idea. ''Don't-give-a-fuckism'' might ruffle a few stuffy people, but who gives a fuck. Right? --] 07:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Pretty much... --]] 22:43, 27 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
NO! I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE DELETED NOW!!!!!!!! I AM SHOCKED AND DEEPLY OFFENDED THAT AN ENCYCLOPEDIA AS FINE AS WIKIPEDIA WOULD CREATE SUCH AN |
|
|
INSULTING ARTICLE!!!!!! ] 18:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:I am shocked an appalled you cannot follow basic Internet conventions on such a fine site as Misplaced Pages. But as it has been stated above, ]. If you want to discuss how this page needs to be revised, or in fact deleted, maybe you should divulge your reasoning other than that you are deeply offended, because that alone is a very hollow argument. --] 20:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Get up off your fucking soapbox == |
|
|
|
|
|
Change the name to reflect politeness, go shag a donkey. --] 15:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:Hahaha... how contradictory. ^_^ --''']]''' 22:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I '''like this essay''' and disagree with the PROD nomination. WP is not censored, is not a democracy. If you don't like the article, '''don't read it.''' — ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small>/<small><sub>]</sub></small> 13:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Please Expand Article== |
|
|
'''DO NOT DELETE THIS ARTICLE''' Oh My God. Best article I ever read here on Misplaced Pages. Surprised it has not been deleted yet. So funny, I cannot help but request for it to be expanded upon. Two thumbs up to the author. :) --] 01:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:Well, awright, I'll try to give a fuck sufficiently to add a little to The Little Essay That Couldn't (Give a Fuck). BTW, I love the userbox, but modified it a bit for my own use. ] (<big><font color="darkred">] ] ]</font></big>) 04:16, 24 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
{{userbox|Yellow|white|DGAF|This user ] and regards ''']''' with ] ].}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== WTF? == |
|
|
|
|
|
What kind of weak, sad article is this? Save your jokes for uncyclopedia. This is a real encyclopedia. ] 23:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
# It's not an article, it's an essay. |
|
|
# Are you saying apathy is a joke? |
|
|
# We know. o''']'''r''']''' <sub>(])</sub> 23:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:A sense of humour is necessary to "get" this essay. Just as it is with ], ], ], and manymanymany titles under ]. ] (<big><font color="darkred">] ] ]</font></big>) 00:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
#I apologize for seeming as though I was trying to shoot down this page. I do think an idea such as "not-giving-a-fuckism" would be funny, however I do not understand what it has to do with an online encyclopedia. It just seems unnecessary or perhaps I simply do not understand its relevance. Maybe if this could be better-explained ] 03:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Comment == |
|
|
|
|
|
It's a very ] idea that conflict comes from attachment (See ] #2) and can be solved only by apathy (See # 3), but it's not a universal idea. But I'm not sure that it is the best use of the Misplaced Pages policy space to promote such a very specific idea about where conflict comes from and how it can be solved, although of course essays, as personal opinions, have more leeway. There are other approaches, after all, to creating harmony. Perhaps it might be better to allow for them, and in particular to allow room for people who care about their opinions and views and explain how we can still be civil with each other, be respectful and fair to opposing ideas, and be careful to check facts while we have whatever opinions we have and give whatever fuck we give about them. This is, after all, most of us. In any event it might be good, even in a humorous essay, to say something like "The ] taught that..." and attribute the conflict-comes-from-attachment-and-is-solved-by-apathy idea rather than presenting it as fact or a Wikipediaism. Suggest that ] is applicable even to an essay on ]! Best, --] 21:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Sounds pretty good. Want to change the essay up a bit? Basically that's the idea behind it: attachment to Misplaced Pages is what causes dissarray. It's kind of ironic. ]] 21:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Deletion == |
|
|
I wish to delete this article(Please do NOT curse at me, using that disgusting f*** word, or I shall report this at WP:Pain). This page is utter nonsense with a shocking amount of cursing and insulting other users. This page is of no coherent use to anyone, in my opinion. This is why I wish to propose a deletion. Anyone who agrees please sign below: {{unsigned|Uioh}} |
|
|
|
|
|
:Cursing is not equivalent to insulting. Far from the contrary actually, this essay really has no intent of insulting or personally attacking anyone. If your main objection is simply the use of curse words, I don't really consider that proper grounds for deletion, as they are nothing more than mere words really. Despite their implied insult-like connotation, few of the "curse words" really mean anything insulting. "Fuck", for example, has evolved from a German word that means "to hit", to an English word that means "to have sexual intercourse", to a verb, noun, adjective, adverb, and gerund that has really no meaning at all. The point of the essay is to simply state a possible mindset or ideology one could take when dealing with Misplaced Pages. If you look beyond the "dirty" words, there's relatively little belligerent attitude taken in the essay. |
|
|
|
|
|
:On a more technical note, the proper place to recommend this for delicious deletion is ] --]] 20:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Wow. He/she/it can't manage to sign their posts, yet they want to take all the naughty bits away from Misplaced Pages? How quaint. Isn't there a stoning or a book burning in their area that they are late for right about now? -- ] <sup>]</sup><sup>|</sup><sup>]</sup> 22:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Well ] raw. I've got me box of stones (Halal gravel perhaps?), my gas can and a box of matches. It's a crystal clear night; where do I meet up ?. I see from the proposers other edit e.g. that they feel that Misplaced Pages should censor articles. I don't really like this Disneyification of Misplaced Pages idea. Misplaced Pages is about consensus and ] come to mind given they seem to want to clean up Misplaced Pages and make it conform to a model for which no policy supports. The deletion of this article would mean that it's purpose and meaning is suspended so that I could be neutral in any ] discussion and thus I would have to by default give a f*ck. To preempt the attempt to delete this I feel that the consensus would be to keep the article and I would hope that they reconsider any attempt. To delete this article would mean to spike what it represents and I feel that is wrong. ] 22:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The problem with this argument for deletion is that there is little or no ground to it. I fail to see what part of this article is nonsensical and although in mainstream society many view various connotations of the word '']'' to be inappropriate, but in this article the connotation is not negative. Fuck is used commonly in the modern American-English language as a filler word often with either strong emotional or apathetic connotations. The connotation used in this article is in the form of apathy, as in "I don't give a fuck." This apathetic frame of mind has been named using this phraseology and constructed into an ism. I do not see how this would lead to a deletion of the article. |
|
|
|
|
|
:Instead of trying to delete an article based on a weak argument, at best, maybe you could discuss how the article could be changed to better suit Misplaced Pages. If you think there are nonsensical portions or coherency problems you could help by pointing those out. Also try and ask yourself what you find disgusting about this article and its use of the word fuck. --] 22:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm responding to this particular editor, if that's the right word, of the discussion as the logic seems clear and careful. As a new user not only of Misplaced Pages but also of the Net, I found some of the other responses on this page unclear (I don't understand the slang),scornful, and disrespectful in ways that seem to contradict editorial policy. This was very disappointing on an otherwise welcoming website. |
|
|
|
|
|
I want to suggest reasons for editing the original article based on general and specific principles. |
|
|
Generally: Some contributors seem to say that censorship is unacceptable. However, if Misplaced Pages stands by its policies of respect for cultures, religions etc then it is indeed advocating censorship based on the assumption that humans (especially vulnerable ones such as children) have the right to be secure from assault, verbal or otherwise. I think this is fair. The people who use sarcasm and exaggerated allusions to criticise other people's requests for more moderate language may be happy to hear such rudeness about themselves but cannot therefore assume the right to be rude. There are good places for expressing strong opinions about other people's opinions but not on Misplaced Pages. |
|
|
|
|
|
Specifically: I agree with the writer that fuck is commonly used but don't agree with the inference that that makes it acceptable. (The same false defence has been used in the past about other words now generally avoided e.g. words used by White people to describe Black slaves. Dr Johnson wrote in the 18th century: The antiquity of an abuse does not justify its continuation!) I personally find fuck offensive unless used for a purpose. It would be fine in the title -- grabs the reader's attention. But to repeat it so often in the text rather loses purpose, like the wit of a child who has learnt one joke and tells it a hundred times to anyone who will listen. Couldn't the word be replaced by an acronym? It was really a good article apart from this irritation. I found it while reading with great interest the lively articles on handling various mastodons. It would be good if this last essay were changed just slightly to reach the high level of the others] 01:32, 13 January 2007 (UTC)stoford. |
|
|
|
|
|
:If the word ] is commonly used then it must be acceptable to those who are using it so commonly. The real question would be whether or not using the world fuck is necessary in this article, as per ]. I think it can easily be argued either way. From my perspective, the connotation and context of the word make all the difference. It does not seem that fuck is being used in a negative context or connotation in the article. |
|
|
|
|
|
:Moreover, I do not see the article being saturated with the word fuck. By my count there are about 595 words in the article and a total of 24 uses of the word fuck or a form of it. This is only a ~4% saturation, which isn't too bad considering the article pertains to the creation of an ism using the word fuck. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== yes == |
|
:In any case, I think we need to continue the discussion on this with more insight of why or why not fuck should be altered, removed, or left as is in the article. ] I believe this article is an acceptable use a profanity, but it's still open to discussion as always. --] 05:32, 13 January 2007 |
|
|
(UTC) |
|
|
::I personally don't care. Delete/replace/edit whatever you want. I won't take it personally. :P --]] 07:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is awesome. ] (]) 21:35, 6 October 2020 (UTC) |
|
With all due respect, I personally wish for this page to be deleted. To me, it is quite pointless and offending to several users, as shown on the Rudeness setion of this page. I agree with them, so I beg of you, ''please'' delete this page. Thanks very much. After all, after all ,I do not really want to be cursed at, and I believe the F word is quite insulting. ] 17:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:Absolutely. ]<sup>]</sup> 14:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{+1}}<span id="ClydeFranklin:1670715747925:Wikipedia_talkFTTCLNDon't-give-a-fuckism" class="FTTCmt"><big>]]</big> 23:42, 10 December 2022 (UTC)</span> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== I think the original slur should be included in the quote == |
|
'''Deletion is not discussion.''' The deletionists, or ''Disneyification of WP'' movement really have no grounds to stand on IMHO other than "I don't like it." Waa, waa, waa. That this essay is now a lightning rod for knee-jerk censors and those who think that "I don't understand it, therefore it has no place here" is a testament to its relevancy. '''If you don't like the essay, don't read it.''' Go outside ... play in the sunshine ... do something nice for your neighbor ... leave the policing of WP to those who aren't as prone to outrage. Oh, and by the way,... DGAFF about registering, even though it might give credibility to your voice. ''Nyaaah!'' ] (<big><font color="darkred">] ] ]</font></big>) 18:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's linked right above, and anyone with ctrl+f can easily find it. I don't really see a purpose to having it censored, but I don't know what was agreed on previously and don't want to get in trouble for re-adding it. What do you guys think? ] (]) 07:28, 20 February 2023 (UTC) |
|
Excuse me, but I believe you were unkind to the user 69.122.3.19. All he did was voice his personal opinion. I suggest you apologize to him at once, please. ] 20:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:It just seems like censorship due to offensive language, it is different because its an essay but WP usually has a no-censorship policy ] (]) 08:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC) |
|
===You've forgotten something...=== |
|
|
|
::I don't know why the censorship, it's just don't take it seriously, it's not difficult, in my opinion, it was truly unfair because it is humorous material, but anyway ] (]) 19:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:Seems fair. I'd say go for it. ] (]) 14:20, 1 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:'''Special Note:''' I am utterly aware that someone can get offended, but understand my side, if you're feels uncomfortable, just looks for somewhat that is in accordance with your precepts and your POV. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Overall, this material, i.e, DGAFkism essay, is not meant to offend any kind of person, and it shouldn't be taken seriously, even because it is humorous content, exclusively humorous, ok? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|
the main idea of this essay seems to be forgotten here. The point is to '''not''' care. If you're getting angered by a so-called "disneyfication of wikipedia" movement, you're doing the exact opposite of what the essay you support recommends you to do. If you're getting angered by pointless and superfluent use of the word fuck, or simply by the perceived lack of a point to this essay, you're caring entirely too much as well. Give the essay some time to evolve and it'll probably become less direct, more meaningful, and less controversial. -]] 20:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Proposal to better fit humor of essay == |
|
==On a more positive note...== |
|
|
I've cleaned up a few chunks of the essay to make it more coherant, and (possibly) less childish. I'm trying to quell the controversy that seems to have sprouted, while at the same time shaping it into a more meaningful idea of what I had in mind. -]] 20:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{redirect|WP:FUCK|the use of potentially offensive words and images in articles|Misplaced Pages:Offensive material}} |
|
== Can we please just be adults, eh? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
change to |
|
If you're offended by the fact that the article makes repetitive use of the word "fuck", I suggest you understand that Misplaced Pages is not censored, and if it offends you that badly then don't look at it. In short, ignore the word fuck by not giving a fuck. '''''<font color="darkblue">]</font><font color="lightblue">]</font>''''' 00:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:No. You ignore that people don't like the word "fuck" by not giving a fuck. If we were all adults we'd all abide by ] and this essay would be deleted in a jiffy.. ;) --''']'''] 14:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::] is an official policy. If you don't keep it, you risk being banished. --''']'''] 14:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Sorry you can't just say "this is uncivil" and that's that. '''Identify the phrases or paragraph that are uncivil,''' please. Convince us other editors of your perspective. Or better yet, edit the article to suit your concerns. .... Perhaps you should review ] ("you risk being banished") and ]. Sounds like '''you're assuming that this essay is an oblique attack''' on WP editors. You are responsible for your own assumptions, including ensuring that you're ]. Make sense? ] (<big><font color="darkred">] ] ]</font></big>) 15:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:**OK, copious amounts of expletives (which are quite unnecessary IMHO) are uncivil. --''']'''] 15:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:***And isn't it true that you risk being banished if you break policies? --''']'''] 15:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Um, couldn't you have assumed that I didn't assume that the author was making personal attacks? :( --''']'''] 15:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ] policy mainly concerned with the way users interact with Misplaced Pages (i.e. the way they edit and discuss on talk pages), not the decency of an article/essay? Misplaced Pages is also ], "A perceived procedural error made in posting anything, such as an idea or nomination, is not grounds for invalidating that post." We usually do not threaten each other with banishment around here, since the normal way of resolving things on WP is to discuss how to best come up with a consensus, ] is not something taken lightly. Lastly, if you find that the use of the word ] is unnecessary ], please discuss with us why you believe this, and how the article could best be improved. —] 18:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{redirect|WP:FUCK|the use of potentially offensive words and images in articles|WP:SHIT}} |
|
:::So would this article be better, for instance, if it had said "Don't give a hoot-ism?" That would please you? '''''<font color="darkblue">]</font><font color="lightblue">]</font>''''' 18:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I feel like this would better fit the humor of the essay, how about you? ] (]) 02:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
== In case you missed the deletion discussion ... == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I like it ] (]) 02:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
...we don't give a fuck if this offends you. If you don't understand what this page is trying to accomplish, or if you're more concerned about your personally being offended than trying to build an encyclopedia and not acting like Misplaced Pages is real life, then you need to report to your nearest clue dispenser. Profanity doesn't bother me...and most people who it does bother can't seem to actually look beyond that. --<font face="Verdana">]]]<small><sup>]|]</sup></small></font> 22:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
It's linked right above, and anyone with ctrl+f can easily find it. I don't really see a purpose to having it censored, but I don't know what was agreed on previously and don't want to get in trouble for re-adding it. What do you guys think? DarmaniLink (talk) 07:28, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
