Talk:Popular culture: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
add banner, {{Talk header}} given top billing using AWB |
|||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
::I've renamed this section to "Intertextuality", lifting a prominent word from the contents of section - it's maybe a bit oblique, so if anyone has a better suggestion ("self-reference"?), feel free to change it. Calling the section about self-reference "[Popular culture] in popular culture" seems needlessly confusing to the reader, and I assume it's just there because of the Xkcd gag. --[[User:McGeddon|McGeddon]] ([[User talk:McGeddon|talk]]) 09:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC) |
::I've renamed this section to "Intertextuality", lifting a prominent word from the contents of section - it's maybe a bit oblique, so if anyone has a better suggestion ("self-reference"?), feel free to change it. Calling the section about self-reference "[Popular culture] in popular culture" seems needlessly confusing to the reader, and I assume it's just there because of the Xkcd gag. --[[User:McGeddon|McGeddon]] ([[User talk:McGeddon|talk]]) 09:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
Anonymous user here--I just noticed that, out of the first ten references, about half a dozen are to Christian POV web sites, though the information attributed is general and not POV. Surely there are better (academic, non-biased) sources from which to draw a characterization of popular culture. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.163.4.60|74.163.4.60]] ([[User talk:74.163.4.60|talk]]) 16:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Anonymous user here--I just noticed that, out of the first ten references, about half a dozen are to Christian POV web sites, though the information attributed is general and not POV. Surely there are better (academic, non-biased) sources from which to draw a characterization of popular culture. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.163.4.60|74.163.4.60]] ([[User talk:74.163.4.60|talk]]) 16:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
I really think someone ought to put in a bit about the xkcd cartoon about this. If no one objects, I could work on it, but if someone is better at this stuff, feel free. It's at: http://xkcd.com/446/. [[User:Bigroryg|Bigroryg]] ([[User talk:Bigroryg|talk]]) 23:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 23:36, 28 December 2010
Template:Outline of knowledge coverage
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Popular culture article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Template:WP1.0
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Popular culture article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
" "In popular culture" in popular culture" in popular culture
Great, i came here to make a joke about the idea of an article about the use of "in popular culture" in popular culture. surprise, we have a subsection on this. now, if we can find evidence in popular culture that this recursive meme itself is being spread, we can have a further subsection with the title of this comment. anyone for infinite recursivity? Oh, its in here already...well, that's actually really cool.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
In Popular Culture
This article needs an In Popular Culture section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.91.201.209 (talk) 21:37, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- yes, since it already has this section, i agree it needs this section, otherwise the section would no longer exist, and the emptiness therein would become a black hole eating up all of WP:)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:19, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- I've renamed this section to "Intertextuality", lifting a prominent word from the contents of section - it's maybe a bit oblique, so if anyone has a better suggestion ("self-reference"?), feel free to change it. Calling the section about self-reference "[Popular culture] in popular culture" seems needlessly confusing to the reader, and I assume it's just there because of the Xkcd gag. --McGeddon (talk) 09:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Anonymous user here--I just noticed that, out of the first ten references, about half a dozen are to Christian POV web sites, though the information attributed is general and not POV. Surely there are better (academic, non-biased) sources from which to draw a characterization of popular culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.4.60 (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC) I really think someone ought to put in a bit about the xkcd cartoon about this. If no one objects, I could work on it, but if someone is better at this stuff, feel free. It's at: http://xkcd.com/446/. Bigroryg (talk) 23:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)