Talk:Hasan Piker: Difference between revisions
(created talk topic about non neutral language on hasan page) |
m (neutrla language) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=== Non-Neutral Language On Page === | === Non-Neutral Language On Page === | ||
As much as we may dislike Hasan his page has a lot of what I would consider non-neutral language. His biography page includes language talking about his "lavish lifestyle" which may be true, but comes off as a hit piece rather than a factual biography. The Young Turks section also has controversial quotes which while it may be true, is probably better suited to be places in the "Controversies" section along with the claims of his lavish lifestyle and any mansion references. For now I'll flag anything controversial that doesn't have a citation. Any thoughts or opposition to the above? [[User:Noonyaaz|Noonyaaz]] ([[User talk:Noonyaaz|talk]]) 04:16, 20 September 2023 (UTC) | As much as we may dislike Hasan his page has a lot of what I would consider non-neutral language. His biography page includes language talking about his "lavish lifestyle" which may be true, but comes off as a hit piece rather than a factual biography. The Young Turks section also has controversial quotes which while it may be true, is probably better suited to be places in the "Controversies" section along with the claims of his lavish lifestyle and any mansion references. For now I'll flag anything controversial that doesn't have a citation. Any thoughts or opposition to the above? [[User:Noonyaaz|Noonyaaz]] ([[User talk:Noonyaaz|talk]]) 04:16, 20 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
[[File:NODDERS.gif]] | |||
We should absolutely be going for as objective/neutral as possible. Things might slip through and humor is allowed in reason. Insulting by omitting context doesn't help anyone and sets a bad precedent. If need be a middle ground would be "Controversial Opinions", especially if ongoing feuding is happening. | |||
—[[user:tape|Tape]] 12:50, 20 September 2023 (EST) | |||
Yeah we really shouldn't need to used too much charged language outside of explicitly memey sections(I kind of tried that with the important sections of the Mike from PA wiki). Like if you're dissecting a debate between Destiny and Hasan it should be really really easy to point to moments where he contradicts himself or does something "weaselly" and timestamp it without coming off too biased. | |||
—[[user:Spr1ggs|Spr1ggs]] 9:30, 20 September 2023 (EST) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:31, 20 September 2023
Non-Neutral Language On Page
As much as we may dislike Hasan his page has a lot of what I would consider non-neutral language. His biography page includes language talking about his "lavish lifestyle" which may be true, but comes off as a hit piece rather than a factual biography. The Young Turks section also has controversial quotes which while it may be true, is probably better suited to be places in the "Controversies" section along with the claims of his lavish lifestyle and any mansion references. For now I'll flag anything controversial that doesn't have a citation. Any thoughts or opposition to the above? Noonyaaz (talk) 04:16, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
We should absolutely be going for as objective/neutral as possible. Things might slip through and humor is allowed in reason. Insulting by omitting context doesn't help anyone and sets a bad precedent. If need be a middle ground would be "Controversial Opinions", especially if ongoing feuding is happening. —Tape 12:50, 20 September 2023 (EST)
Yeah we really shouldn't need to used too much charged language outside of explicitly memey sections(I kind of tried that with the important sections of the Mike from PA wiki). Like if you're dissecting a debate between Destiny and Hasan it should be really really easy to point to moments where he contradicts himself or does something "weaselly" and timestamp it without coming off too biased.
—Spr1ggs 9:30, 20 September 2023 (EST)