Is there objection to retitling this essay? The use of such a broad title forces other views into secondary status. While there may be a disclaimer that this is an essay, not policy, giving this the title "Ageism" but forcing opposition into a title like "Opposing Ageism" gives the impression that tthis is officially supported over its opposition. I would suggest having this article, and an opposing article, with similar but differentiating titles, perhaps making this a disambiguation page. --MaxHarmony (talk) 03:22, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- oppose. It's an essay, as far as I know, we don't have dabs for essays.---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 04:06, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Also, as essays, the fact that this has the name it does doesn't matter as much as if it were an article.---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 18:16, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
I recommend deleting this essay. It is poorly documented in that it relies on secondhand quotes as source material, prejudicial claims that are not acceptable for application to entire demographic groups, wrongly cited and unsourced statistical data, personal quips, and nonsensical conclusions in that it is impossible to determine what the author's point is. Mmales (talk) 05:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
This article should be deleted. It raises no legitimate issues, is unscholarly, is prejudicial toward a demographic group, would not be permitted in these pages if its target were any demographic group other than adolescents, and it is frankly nonsensical in that it presents contradictory conclusions. Neither the authors nor the editors have made any response to my deletion request. I believe this page is being preserved solely because Wiki editors are privileging the personal prejudices of a fellow staff member. I spent extensive time presenting a scholarly refutation of this article with extensive source documentation, and I have yet to hear any justification as to why this incoherent attack on adolescents is relevant to Wiki information or internal policy issues. I would also appreciate your deletion of the Mike A. Males page, since I want nothing to do with Wikipedia now that it's clear that you permit your staff to express unreasoned bigotry toward young people and then refuse to present well-researched responses188.8.131.52 (talk) 06:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
- If you want your talk page deleted, you need to log on to your page and make the request. An anon IP cannot make such a request and be respected. As for this page... huh? It is not attacking adolescents, it is defending their right to run for admin and that age is not a legitimate reason to oppose. The scientific fact that as a group teens are less mature/responsible is not untrue, it is accepted by the sceintific community and courts. But that deals with whole populations, not individuals. Within every population, individuals can stand out and rise above their peers and stereotypes. As for the merits... obviously you weren't around for the numerous RfA's where Ageism was the buzz word. Luckily, since this essay has been written, that argument has rarely been brought up. And BTW, this is an essay, not an article. Different standards apply.---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 15:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I am logged on as Mike A. Males, or Mmales. I recommend deleting this page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ageism under the same criteria that were used to delete my response to this article. The author exploits a non-issue, by his own admission, of evaluating a Wiki submission on its merits, not on the race, age, or other demographic characteristics of the submitter as a vehicle to launch into a thoroughly unscientific, one-sided, poorly documented attack on adolescents. The author could just have easily have cast doubt on submissions based on, say, African Americans' high homicide rates or other social-statistics irrelevancies along with prejudical racial claims.
I was asked by youth rights advocates to respond to this essay. The author, the anonymous "Balloonman," sweepingly claims courts and the scientific community support his views but, by the superficial evidence of his essay, he has not done or presented sufficient scientific research to substantiate that his claims amount to any more than personal bigotry against adolescents. The author's lengthy misrepresentations about adolescents are neither relevant to nor supportive of his contradictory claim of supporting adolescents' rights and should be deleted. The essay is poorly written, relies on secondhand, mostly miscited or unreliable pop-media sources, and is not worthy of Wikipedia presentation under even lenient criteria.
If Wiki is going to permit this kind of attack on a demographic group, it should allow responses to that attack in the same forum; if Wiki deletes my response, based on dozens of scientific and scholarly citations, it should delete the original, scientifically baseless post by the same standards. I believe Wiki editors are privileging the groundless prejudices of their staff member and exploiting tehnicalities to shield it from reasoned, scientific response, which I had provided. Wiki clearly would not permit a prejudicial essay based on race, gender, ethnicity, etc., especially without allowing a response, and it should not permit such essays based on prejudices about age. This essay contributes nothing to reasoned discussion except illogic and misnomers, and it should be deleted. Mmales (talk) 06:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)