Requests for comment/Wiki Loves X

The following request for comments is closed. No consensus to change anything through this RfC. – Ajraddatz (talk) 02:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[]


Does the title "Wiki Loves X" as in "Wiki Loves Monuments" or "Wiki Loves Pride" imply an official standing or endorsement of the "X" in conflict with the Neutral Point of View founding principle? If so, what alternative title(s) should be used?

This question has its origin in the talk page en:Wikipedia talk:Wiki Loves Pride 2014. Multiple editors agreed to discuss alternative terms and that a request for community comment is appropriate. This RfC is taking place on Meta because the title "Wiki Loves X" is used for events on multiple Wikimedia projects. --Pine 07:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[]


* The title "Wiki Loves X" does not conflict with the Neutral Point of View principle (comment and sign below)Edit

* The title "Wiki Loves X" may conflict with the Neutral Point of View principle under some circumstances (comment and sign below)Edit

The title "Wiki Loves X" is appropriate for many circumstances. Unfortunately, it now seems people with certain unpopular or controversial agendas and ideas would simply like to push those using the prefix "Wiki Loves X", because when the public sees that, the public might think that Wikipedia's proprietors (the Wikimedia Foundation) really loves or endorses the controversial subjects.

A non-existing example of misuse is using "Wiki Loves Faith" for Christian projects. This presents the subject as if Wikipedia's proprietors endorse Christian activities. Now, this title may have been okay if the word "faith" were used in context of sports (the belief that one is ready to win a match), and not for the heavily controversial subject like religion.

An existing example of misuse is using "Wiki Loves Pride" for LGBT projects. This presents the subject as if Wikipedia's proprietors endorse LGBT activities. Now, this may have been okay if "pride" were used in context of lions.

Personally, I have lots of subjects and beliefs that I could possibly push through this kind of "game", and I believe many other Wikipedians also do. Allowing this kind of misuse may result in counter-subjects using similar "Wiki Loves X" titles.

Should "Wiki Loves X" be changed then? My answer is no, because there are more appropriate use of it than the opposite. The best thing to do is to moderate the use of it and make sure controversial subjects aren't presented as if the Wikimedia Foundation endorses them. It's a pity that many people are dying in war in Syria, but this doesn't mean Wikipedia has to step in and show its support for a particular group such as either the presumed aggressors or the group receiving the aggression. Wikipedia is simply for neutral encyclopedic content. --Nosugarcoating (talk) 13:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[]

* The title "Wiki Loves X" conflicts with the Neutral Point of View principle under all circumstances (comment and sign below)Edit

Proposed alternativesEdit

Alternative 1: Your idea hereEdit

Wiki Loves Crossing? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[]

SupportEdit

  1. Support Support. I lol'ed. People may think "Wiki" as Wikimedia anyway, how misleading... tsk tsk tsk... Yep they better change it.--AldNonymousBicara? 19:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[]
  2. Support Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 07:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[]

NeutralEdit

OpposeEdit

DiscussEdit

  1. "Wiki" doesn't mean Wikimedia anyway. "Wiki Loves X" means nothing. What is wiki? How can a type of software which allows editing websites love anything? PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:31, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[]

Alternative 2: Your idea hereEdit

SupportEdit

NeutralEdit

OpposeEdit

DiscussEdit


Proposing to close discussionEdit

This proposal didn't get legs. Should it be closed, or are you looking to better promote its existence?  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:26, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[]