Talk:Nonhuman National Park - Revision history

Jarandhel: /* Controversy */

2022-01-09T02:10:42Z

Controversy

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:10, 8 January 2022
Line 3:		Line 3:

	: I used the "Controversy" label just because it'd seemed to be the most consistently used label across the wiki for what I was talking about-- "criticism" seems like a fairly neutral replacement term, if it'd be preferred. Though I suppose it's well worth pointing out that technically Therian Guide isn't the only forum to take issue with this policy, their moderation team is just the only one who has said so outright and publicly; I also know that administration on the Werelist and I believe Otherkin Phenomena has issue with the policy as well. It's in a bit of a strange place where several notable established/older members of the community seem to take issue with it, which I think is worth including, but also that a majority of its userbase and the active otherkin and alterhuman communities don't consider it controversial. If not criticism, maybe critique? Maybe "Outside Commentary"? ---- [[User:Who-is-Page\|Who-is-Page]] ([[User talk:Who-is-Page\|talk]]) 12:42, 8 January 2022 (EST)		: I used the "Controversy" label just because it'd seemed to be the most consistently used label across the wiki for what I was talking about-- "criticism" seems like a fairly neutral replacement term, if it'd be preferred. Though I suppose it's well worth pointing out that technically Therian Guide isn't the only forum to take issue with this policy, their moderation team is just the only one who has said so outright and publicly; I also know that administration on the Werelist and I believe Otherkin Phenomena has issue with the policy as well. It's in a bit of a strange place where several notable established/older members of the community seem to take issue with it, which I think is worth including, but also that a majority of its userbase and the active otherkin and alterhuman communities don't consider it controversial. If not criticism, maybe critique? Maybe "Outside Commentary"? ---- [[User:Who-is-Page\|Who-is-Page]] ([[User talk:Who-is-Page\|talk]]) 12:42, 8 January 2022 (EST)

			:: I think criticism, outside commentary, or even opposition might work. And I may go back and review the other places controversy has been used in the wiki to see if any of those would be more appropriate. I'm surprised that the criticism is so widespread, I'd have thought it was just Therian Guide. It's unfortunate that the others have not made documentable public statements of their position. Having that be a matter of public record might be helpful in promoting positive change in the community by putting pressure on those established/older members rather than the other way around. ---- [[User:Jarandhel\|Jarandhel]] ([[User_talk:Jarandhel\|talk]]) 21:10, 8 January 2022 (EST)

Who-is-Page: /* Controversy */

2022-01-08T17:42:19Z

Controversy

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:42, 8 January 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	===== Controversy =====		===== Controversy =====
	Is this the best label for this section, since the source of the criticism is itself a highly controversial one? I'm worried that implying there is widespread controversy surrounding this site is giving The Therian Guide's fringe position undue weight. Though I do think their position on the subject is valuable to document. Would "criticism" be a more neutral section heading? Or something else entirely? ---- [[User:Jarandhel\|Jarandhel]] ([[User_talk:Jarandhel\|talk]]) 08:01, 7 January 2022 (EST)		Is this the best label for this section, since the source of the criticism is itself a highly controversial one? I'm worried that implying there is widespread controversy surrounding this site is giving The Therian Guide's fringe position undue weight. Though I do think their position on the subject is valuable to document. Would "criticism" be a more neutral section heading? Or something else entirely? ---- [[User:Jarandhel\|Jarandhel]] ([[User_talk:Jarandhel\|talk]]) 08:01, 7 January 2022 (EST)

			: I used the "Controversy" label just because it'd seemed to be the most consistently used label across the wiki for what I was talking about-- "criticism" seems like a fairly neutral replacement term, if it'd be preferred. Though I suppose it's well worth pointing out that technically Therian Guide isn't the only forum to take issue with this policy, their moderation team is just the only one who has said so outright and publicly; I also know that administration on the Werelist and I believe Otherkin Phenomena has issue with the policy as well. It's in a bit of a strange place where several notable established/older members of the community seem to take issue with it, which I think is worth including, but also that a majority of its userbase and the active otherkin and alterhuman communities don't consider it controversial. If not criticism, maybe critique? Maybe "Outside Commentary"? ---- [[User:Who-is-Page\|Who-is-Page]] ([[User talk:Who-is-Page\|talk]]) 12:42, 8 January 2022 (EST)

Jarandhel: Controversy?

2022-01-07T13:01:39Z

Controversy?

New page

===== Controversy =====
Is this the best label for this section, since the source of the criticism is itself a highly controversial one? I'm worried that implying there is widespread controversy surrounding this site is giving The Therian Guide's fringe position undue weight. Though I do think their position on the subject is valuable to document. Would "criticism" be a more neutral section heading? Or something else entirely? ---- [[User:Jarandhel|Jarandhel]] ([[User_talk:Jarandhel|talk]]) 08:01, 7 January 2022 (EST)