Talk:Greased piglet: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:32, 12 July 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Greased piglet article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Politics of the United Kingdom Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Notability?

I know we've had a bit of fun with this article, but to survive the 'notability' test, we need to show evidence of "significant coverage" in reliable sources.

Per WP:GNG, these reliable sources have to "addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content". That means finding a number of reliable, preferably academic, sources that describe the subject of "greased piglet" in detail (its etymology, its use, etc., and probably containing what the authors of those sources see as notable examples of its use). It doesn't mean us just finding loads of sources that use the nickname as, err, a nickname to take the piss out of Johnson. And it doesn't mean citing cherry-picked sources, that do nothing but use the the term, and calling them examples - that would be original research.

GNG also says that "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material".

Without this, it could be a prime candidate for deletion. Do we think we can find these? -- DeFacto (talk). 13:39, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You might have raised this question just after I did this, about three hours ago? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:49, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was eagerly anticipating the arrival of suitable sources, but they didn't seem to to arriving. -- DeFacto (talk). 14:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Always good to be positive. What's the deadline? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:02, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Before someone adds an AfD tag? -- DeFacto (talk). 14:06, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that's possible at any time? I think we're assuming you won't actually do that yet. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not planning to, I'm hoping the sources will turn up before someone else does though. -- DeFacto (talk). 14:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have several quality references that focus on the term, including an Economist article that I just added. More to come. 78.18.245.153 (talk) 13:51, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But apparently it's not sufficient to have (very) many sources using the term, we also need an WP:RS that explicitly says that "it's widely used". Martinevans123 (talk) 13:54, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Economist one has a paywall, so I can't read it. Does it discuss the nickname itself (the subject of this article), or use it to discuss Johnson? -- DeFacto (talk). 14:10, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It does, if right-click the link you can read the "cached" version. 78.18.245.153 (talk) 14:35, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any "cached" option with Chrome. -- DeFacto (talk). 15:09, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on chrome, if you right-click the "three vertical dots" that appear on the rightmost end of the search, you will be offered a dialoge box, on the botto of which says "Cached", which you can read. 78.18.245.153 (talk) 15:20, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the "rightmost end of" of what search? I'm reading the Wikipedia page and clicking the little reference number in square brackets, then clicking the article title in the references entry. -- DeFacto (talk). 15:55, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think IP78 means just in Google search, not inside Wiki. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:08, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can probably forget about "preferably academic" for the time being. But it depends on what you mean by "academic"? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:58, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. 78.18.245.153 (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Published by someone other than the biased and/or anti-Johnson news media really I suppose. Like peer-reviewed politics journals, for example. -- DeFacto (talk). 14:03, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would imagine such journals would have a review cycle of several months, perhaps more. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:13, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But we don't even have a less prestigious source yet, one that discusses it, rather than simply uses it. Do we? -- DeFacto (talk). 14:22, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are not wrong. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:27, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't the Economist article meet that test? (plus The Times editorial titled "Greased Piglet" discusses it - they only need to say the term once and then why it exists, which is the bulk of the article). 78.18.245.153 (talk) 14:33, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Upper case P?

Does the balance of sources support an upper case P? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:35, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 :::::::I think IP78 means just in Google search, not inside Wiki. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 16:08, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 :I think we can probably forget about "preferably academic" for the time being. But it depends on what you mean by "academic"? [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 13:58, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
+::::::::Exactly. [[Special:Contributions/78.18.245.153|78.18.245.153]] ([[User talk:78.18.245.153|talk]]) 16:32, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 ::Published by someone other than the biased and/or anti-Johnson news media really I suppose. Like peer-reviewed politics journals, for example. -- [[User:DeFacto|DeFacto]] ([[User Talk:DeFacto|talk]]). 14:03, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 :::I would imagine such journals would have a review cycle of several months, perhaps more. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 14:13, 12 July 2022 (UTC)