The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This subforum is for critical evaluation of Wikipedia articles. However, to reduce topic-bloat, please make note of exceptionally poor stubs, lists, and other less attention-worthy material in the Miscellaneous Grab Bag thread. Also, please be aware that agents of the Wikimedia Foundation might use your evaluations to improve the articles in question.

Useful Links: Featured Article CandidatesFeatured Article ReviewArticles for DeletionDeletion Review

3 Pages V < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Donkey punch, The new face of education
Web Fred
post Tue 20th March 2012, 11:40am
Post #41


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 20th March 2012, 8:29am) *

QUOTE(Angela Kennedy @ Mon 19th March 2012, 6:59pm) *

Why Sue Gardner?

Because she's head of the WMF...


In that case she should be facing the other way in the animation.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HRIP7
post Tue 20th March 2012, 11:48am
Post #42


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat 6th Feb 2010, 3:58pm
Member No.: 17,020

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Mon 19th March 2012, 8:55pm) *

QUOTE(Angela Kennedy @ Mon 19th March 2012, 2:03pm) *
Or indeed, Jimbo's face image super-imposed on the woman... or would that be 'beyond the pale'?

No, you need Sue Gardner's face on the woman, and then have a debate about whether it's beyond the pale. It might actually be a good metaphor, tbh.

I can picture a number of people who would argue earnestly that it would be a poignant and educational illustration of the Wikimedia Gendergap that could be used in a myriad educational contexts. In fact, the Hot sex barnstar is educational too, because it can educate the public about Commons. So you see? It's all educational.

At any rate, it would be no worse than a homemade Santorum caricature painted with dogshit. They've hosted several of those in Commons, and only just managed to delete them.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Tue 20th March 2012, 12:46pm
Post #43


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Mon 19th March 2012, 8:55pm) *

QUOTE(Angela Kennedy @ Mon 19th March 2012, 2:03pm) *
Or indeed, Jimbo's face image super-imposed on the woman... or would that be 'beyond the pale'?

No, you need Sue Gardner's face on the woman, and then have a debate about whether it's beyond the pale. It might actually be a good metaphor, tbh.

"Calling all vandals..." laugh.gif


I was going to put his ex-girlfriend's (never can remember her name) head on the woman, but couldn't find a suitable image.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HRIP7
post Tue 20th March 2012, 1:58pm
Post #44


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat 6th Feb 2010, 3:58pm
Member No.: 17,020

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Tue 20th March 2012, 12:46pm) *

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Mon 19th March 2012, 8:55pm) *

QUOTE(Angela Kennedy @ Mon 19th March 2012, 2:03pm) *
Or indeed, Jimbo's face image super-imposed on the woman... or would that be 'beyond the pale'?

No, you need Sue Gardner's face on the woman, and then have a debate about whether it's beyond the pale. It might actually be a good metaphor, tbh.

"Calling all vandals..." laugh.gif


I was going to put his ex-girlfriend's (never can remember her name) head on the woman, but couldn't find a suitable image.
Never mind; it's perhaps just as well. Here's a nice video though, made by our contributor It's the Blimp, if I recall correctly.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Angela Kennedy
post Wed 21st March 2012, 12:20pm
Post #45


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 302
Joined: Sun 30th Sep 2007, 8:05am
Member No.: 3,293

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(HRIP7 @ Tue 20th March 2012, 11:40am) *

QUOTE(Angela Kennedy @ Mon 19th March 2012, 7:03pm) *

Or indeed, Jimbo's face image super-imposed on the woman... or would that be 'beyond the pale'?

The Snowballing (sexual practice) (T-H-L-K-D) article used to have an image of two women cum-swapping, even though the text described an act between a man and a woman. When the image was changed, so the man was the receiver, complaints went up, even though it now at least matched the text.

Go figure.


Yes.

My use of the 'gay' scenario was nothing to do with gay sex, actually, it was to do with violence against men, and how acceptable THAT sort of animation would be. That animation isn't about sex, it's about violence, a non-consensual act. The whole 'Donkey Punch' debacle is underscored by the issue of violence, against women. I was drawing attention to that, because it's getting lost in that whole thing going on over there.

So with this in mind, bearing in mind that Sue Gardner's witterings about women and gender are, rightfully, disdained (she's missed so many of the actual points about the problem of gender in the context of Wikipedia), having her as the woman in that animation vitually legitimises the Donkey Punch! That's the topsy-turvy crazy zany world of Wikipedia sexual politics we live in.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th 10 14, 12:41pm