Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Delegitimization as a tactic: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:50, 20 September 2011 editEnkyo2 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 editsm →Misplaced Pages:Delegitimization as a tactic: link -- Namespace or Mainspace← Previous edit		Revision as of 16:42, 20 September 2011 edit undoEnkyo2 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 edits →Misplaced Pages:Delegitimization as a tactic: not about Bob, but if the shoe fitsNext edit →
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Uninsightful, garbled personal essay, serves only as a highly idiosyncratic personal argument by which one troubled editor apparently means to defend himself from his critics. "Delegitimation refers to the process whereby an editor and his or her diffs are undermined because of an alleged deviation from wiki-norms. It becomes a distraction from closer scrutiny of the content of an editor's writing. It is marginalizing or devaluing the legitimacy of a contributor to our encyclopedia building project." What is this supposed to mean, beyond "I feel butthurt because people have criticized my editing so much"? Delete or userfy; no chance this will become a useful opinion reference that others will commonly have reasons to refer to. ] ] 03:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)		Uninsightful, garbled personal essay, serves only as a highly idiosyncratic personal argument by which one troubled editor apparently means to defend himself from his critics. "Delegitimation refers to the process whereby an editor and his or her diffs are undermined because of an alleged deviation from wiki-norms. It becomes a distraction from closer scrutiny of the content of an editor's writing. It is marginalizing or devaluing the legitimacy of a contributor to our encyclopedia building project." What is this supposed to mean, beyond "I feel butthurt because people have criticized my editing so much"? Delete or userfy; no chance this will become a useful opinion reference that others will commonly have reasons to refer to. ] ] 03:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
	:Tenmei probably wrote this article as part of his rant ] against other parties in an on-going ArbCom case. As it occurs, I am the person he is complaining about. --] (]) 03:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)		:Tenmei probably wrote this article as part of his rant ] against other parties in an on-going ArbCom case. As it occurs, I am the person he is complaining about. --] (]) 03:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
			::] -- Bob provides a pointed example of tactical ]. His words appear plausible; but in fact, his '']'' comment only of this essay. The verb "]" is an example of ] which .<p>This is parsed explicitly ,

			:::"An important ] -- for me, perhaps the most starkly brilliant breakthrough -- <s>in this ArbCom case</s> is a verb Magog introduced in evidence about Bobthefish2 . This verb and what Magog says it means are useful in contexts beyond the ambit of this case. As an exemplar of explaining something novel <s>in an ArbCom context</s>, Magog's use of this verb should be highlighted, e.g.,
			::::" (emphasis added)
			:::"The term or the idea ']' needs to be re-stated and underscored. Wiktionary does not explain or define this word in the way Magog uses it; nevertheless, Magog's conceptual insight needs to embraced."
			::<u>Bottom line</u>. The time and thought invested in researching and writing this essay were not about Bob. --] (]) 16:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
	{{outdent}} '''Keep''' -- As I explained on the talk page , this term is new to me. However, the concept of "delegitimization as a tactic" appears to have been used with some frequency, including community discussions about ].		{{outdent}} '''Keep''' -- As I explained on the talk page , this term is new to me. However, the concept of "delegitimization as a tactic" appears to have been used with some frequency, including community discussions about ].
	* The history of recurrent and increasing usage in a range of Mainspace (]) contexts suggests (a) the arguable relevance of the subject; and (b) the plausible likelihood of potential contributors who may expand it -- ''compare''		* The history of recurrent and increasing usage in a range of Mainspace (]) contexts suggests (a) the arguable relevance of the subject; and (b) the plausible likelihood of potential contributors who may expand it -- ''compare''

Revision as of 16:42, 20 September 2011

Misplaced Pages:Delegitimization as a tactic

Uninsightful, garbled personal essay, serves only as a highly idiosyncratic personal argument by which one troubled editor apparently means to defend himself from his critics. "Delegitimation refers to the process whereby an editor and his or her diffs are undermined because of an alleged deviation from wiki-norms. It becomes a distraction from closer scrutiny of the content of an editor's writing. It is marginalizing or devaluing the legitimacy of a contributor to our encyclopedia building project." What is this supposed to mean, beyond "I feel butthurt because people have criticized my editing so much"? Delete or userfy; no chance this will become a useful opinion reference that others will commonly have reasons to refer to. Fut.Perf. ☼ 03:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Tenmei probably wrote this article as part of his rant Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Senkaku_Islands/Workshop#Delegitimization_as_a_tactic against other parties in an on-going ArbCom case. As it occurs, I am the person he is complaining about. --Bobthefish2 (talk) 03:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

QED -- Bob provides a pointed example of tactical delegitimisation. His words appear plausible; but in fact, his ad hominem comment only "attacks the characteristics or authority of the writer without addressing the substance of this essay. The verb "wikt:rant" is an example of loaded language which "criticises the tone of the writing without addressing the substance of the argument".

This is parsed explicitly here,

"An important lesson learned the hard way -- for me, perhaps the most starkly brilliant breakthrough -- ~~in this ArbCom case~~ is a verb Magog introduced in evidence about Bobthefish2 here. This verb and what Magog says it means are useful in contexts beyond the ambit of this case. As an exemplar of explaining something novel ~~in an ArbCom context~~, Magog's use of this verb should be highlighted, e.g.,

"Notably, before the event even occurred, I'd already been expecting for Bob to pick a fight sooner or later in an attempt to delegitimize me. I was proven magnificently correct. It's difficult to believe it was an organic thought process (and not an opportunity to pick a fight) given how quickly it happened. (emphasis added)

"The term or the idea 'WP:Delegitimization' needs to be re-stated and underscored. Wiktionary does not explain or define this word in the way Magog uses it; nevertheless, Magog's conceptual insight needs to embraced."

Bottom line. The time and thought invested in researching and writing this essay were not about Bob. --Tenmei (talk) 16:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Keep -- As I explained on the talk page here, this term is new to me. However, the concept of "delegitimization as a tactic" appears to have been used with some frequency, including community discussions about articles for deletion.

The history of recurrent and increasing usage in a range of Mainspace (WP:Namespace) contexts suggests (a) the arguable relevance of the subject; and (b) the plausible likelihood of potential contributors who may expand it -- compare Misplaced Pages search results
The use of this term in a range of real world contexts suggests that it has become a "buzz word", which suggests continued and increasing Mainspace usage in the near future -- compare Google search results.

This array of factors are unrelated to the speculative comments in the diffs above. --Tenmei (talk) 14:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)