| Revision as of 16:52, 8 September 2019 edit109.79.177.91 (talk) →Trump era← Previous edit |
Revision as of 02:58, 28 November 2019 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,067 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Idiocracy/Archive 2) (botNext edit → |
| Line 15: |
Line 15: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Auto archiving notice|=Lowercase sigmabot III|age= |units= 90 days}} |
|
{{Auto archiving notice|=Lowercase sigmabot III|age= |units= 90 days}} |
|
|
|
|
== Salon article - reliable? == |
|
|
|
|
|
A search through the archives over at ] shows that ] is considered a reliable source, and the fact that an editor doesn't agree with the points raised falls into the ] category. Rather if the points are contested - find a source that backs up your theory, rather than just removing it because you don't like it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is an opinion put forward in an article, but so Etan Cohen and David Berry's - the article in this case even uses the term "opinion" when referring to the latter. Sorry that the source isn't to your liking, but that's life. Please discuss here, rather than edit-warring to try and get your way. ] (]) 13:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Agreed. The source is reliable and the stated opinion is valid as an opinion, whether we agree with it or not. ---<font face="Georgia">''']'''</font><font face="Courier New"><sub>'']''</sub></font> 14:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The source can be referenced with in-text attribution. However, per ], I would suggest avoiding "accused". Furthermore, it would help to reference similar commentary about eugenics and classism. Regarding eugenics, it appears that Gizmodo and ''Vice'' have also written about this aspect of the film. ] (] | ]) <sup>(])</sup> 18:27, 20 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::If you're referring to the discussion above, it wasn't "an editor", it was three editors. And just because Salon is a reliable source, a free pass isn't created for every op-ed piece to be included. Your local newspaper is most likely a reliable source, but a letter to the editor or "guest opinion" doesn't become reliable simply because they print it. Claiming reliability simply because of where it was printed is overly simplistic. ] (]) 21:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I only count two editors, one of whose rationale for removal included use of the phrase ''"Fuck your Nevertheless. Fuck you all, leftist cunts"'' - powerful argument indeed. |
|
|
:::To compare Adam Johnson to a letter to the editor or "guest opinion" is inaccurate - Johnson has written over 20 articles for Salon, and as Salon has editorial control over content and has been praised by other online media - ''"Salon.com Wins Credibility Online With Intelligent and Stylish Content"'' - in this case it seems reasonable to assume that if it's printed, it's reliable. ] (]) 17:23, 22 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Sorry, I was referring to something else when I mentioned that is was more than one editor. And yes, I would consider this an op-ed piece. It was originally published at Alternet and it's written in the first person. ] (]) 17:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::*No one is trying to write, "The film supports eugenics," full stop. It is an opinionated statement, and there is ] that ]s the quote. As I mentioned, two other sources have similar comments and can also be included (also with in-text attribution). ] (] | ]) <sup>(])</sup> 22:20, 22 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: I read the article as warning and an indictment of the left particularly this: {{cquote|wielding "Idiocracy" as a kind of political shorthand for a new, and therefore meaningful, shift in our political climate is both inaccurate and politically toxic for the left.}} |
|
|
:::: I edited the text slightly and moved the article so that it was with the other Trump Era '''Commentary''' and not in the Critical response section. -- ] (]) 22:32, 29 August 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Marlon Brawndo == |
|
|
|
|
|
* https://www.avclub.com/thomas-haden-church-has-never-seen-hellboy-or-idiocracy-1837051681/ |
|
|
CEO of Brawndo was named ] but it wasn't properly includded in the end credits. Maybe this could go in the cast section or Production section. -- ] (]) 15:32, 14 August 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Trump era == |
|
== Trump era == |
The topic of Idiocracy has come up in the news quite often during the era of Trump. There were multiple sources and this was added but removed from the Commentary section. It might need some review and improvement but I don't think it should have been
The section of Commentary seems to state in a factual manner that Trump's policies mirror ineffective and unintellectual themes of Idiocracy, rather than clarifying that that is what the article in question is making claim to. I believe this needs to be reworded to accurately reflect it is an opinion, not factual, in order to follow Misplaced Pages's guidelines on neutrality. Tradeojax6 (talk) 02:57, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
