Talk:Sealioning
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sealioning 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: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Sealioning. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Sealioning at the Reference desk. |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
![]() | 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 |
This is not a valid Wikipedia page
This is not a valid Wikipedia page and doesn’t add any value.
It’s obviously been set up by someone to win an argument on Twitter or Reddit but it existing adds nothing to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a dictionary and not a place to win personal crusades.
suggest it should be deleted. 86.144.169.36 (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
What counts as topical debate and genuine interest?
I'm almost afraid (because this article is on the Wiki and not in the Wiktionary) that I will be perceived as someone sea-lioning by replying to this Talk page at an interval of years.
Yet it seems to me that the party that loses interest, or wants to escape topical debate by claiming that they are being harassed, are not as interested in the topic as the one they want a meme comic to portray as a troll.
I'm not affected at all by the presence of this article on Wikipedia, except for the fact that it's on the Wiki and not in the Wiktionary. I just didn't understand the word and found a meme in an encyclopedia.
Surely, this was some temporary thing long ago and no longer relevant, especially since - if it is trolling - there is already an article for that.
I just don't see it. What is this beyond some unknown person being trolled somewhere on some forum or social media and deciding s/he didn't have time time pursue the topic, if s/he were really honest? S/he just wanted to make a bold claim and then rather not answer questions from that. If it was a temporary experience that felt like trolling from asking for proof as Wikipedia asks of every edit, why not call it that and remove the article?
If it suggests persistence or staying on topic, how is this bad compared to some blogger wanting to hit and run? Surely Wikipedia can't arbiter in favor of that and have success. It's simply a poor decision that reflects badly on Wikipedia.
This is why I again suggest Deletion appealing to article 6, 8, 10, and 14 (second pillar of Wikipedia). I would support moving this to the Wiktionary, in order that it not taint the status of Wikipedia as an on-line encyclopedia. I have no stake in any discussion involving some persistent on-line intellect seeking truth from a statement they found correct or incorrect.
We have [[1]] already.
We have [[2]] already.
So, why is this page here?
Henrik Erlandsson 01:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HenrikErlandsson (talk • contribs)
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Start-Class Internet culture articles
- Low-importance Internet culture articles
- Internet culture articles needing images
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- Start-Class Philosophy articles
- Low-importance Philosophy articles
- Start-Class logic articles
- Low-importance logic articles
- Logic task force articles
- Start-Class social and political philosophy articles
- Low-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- Start-Class Linguistics articles
- Low-importance Linguistics articles
- WikiProject Linguistics articles
- Start-Class psychology articles
- Low-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- Start-Class Skepticism articles
- Low-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- WikiProject templates with unknown parameters