Information icon.svg Our policy on articles on living people is under review. Your comments and inputs are welcome on the relevant project talkpage.

Fun talk:Northwest Territories

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I'm sure this is well written but, upon a quick scan, it seems that this is wildly off mission? Tielec01 (talk) 00:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Totnesmartin thought Nunavut Territory "content was:extremely dull" on 6 January 2010.Civic CatTalk to Civic Cat 20:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure he was right. So is this, by the way. I'm stripping it back to (potential) mission-friendly content, and then we can discuss whether to keep what's left. SophieWilderModerator 20:53, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Suit yourself. Even better if you read my few words on the subject here before continued trimming. Thanks.Civic CatTalk to Civic Cat 21:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
yes, but... it's just a place. A lot of this article is just waffle. TBH I have no idea why we have articles about provinces, states and territories, and even a few country articles are a bit pointless. SophieWilderModerator 21:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
So what is this article.... for?--MikallakiM 21:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
We have them for two reasons: 1, despite always saying "we are not an encyclopedia" "we are not competing with wikipedia", it feels liek it. so you say "oh, i know something about X, and i can be snarky, there fore it must be written!" or another way of saying it - snark feels a lot like "mission" even when it's wildly NOT. 2) there was this time when we felt we needed "more articles to be taken seriously" and got really lost at that point on what mission was. that's when we added math, and non-mission "science for science sake" articles, and some of the types of govt articles, ets. Its' also when we added the sexuality stuff, the feminist stuff. Some, like the sexuality, feminist, and govt articles we managed to understand WERE on mission, when you focus them. not simply "the 9 months of pregnancy look like X" , but rather "pregnancy falls into pseudo science because it is associated with myths, pseduo cures, and birth control".
My answer, then, is never to dump the articles, but to reframe them - a bit like Sophie just did. How can we look at issues, say of how indigenous are treated, or this terrirotries roll in global warming, to keep it more "on mission". rambling. sorryGreen mowse.pngGodot The ablity to breath is such an overrated ability 21:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Guess I jumped the gun in deleting it then. You can bring it back if you really think it's worth grasping a tenuous focus for it. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 21:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I've long since stopped caring about whether or not an article is on-mission not. I just go with the flow, unless I feel like defending an edit or a user-sub-page.  ;-)    Civic CatTalk to Civic Cat 21:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

While that's great for you, mission matters. I do spend a significant amount of time looking at every article i edit for the point of mission. RW is not just about one type of science denier or another. We can be a resource for all kinds of people curious about anti science, anti-education, anti-thought. Rather than having a cluster fuck of random articles, you ask "what does this article contribue". i really think there is virtually no topic that can't be addressed on mission, if one wants to. I just think we aught to be more into -not just writing - but writing something that adds to our site, but also the conversation at large.

So, what is this article for...?[edit]

I think there are critical things about NT that can be very on mission.

  1. It is central to many of the studies of global warming proof, but also how it can and does impact wild life, subsistance living, flood zones, etc.
  2. The indigenous people issue - matters. What is the reality of life there vs. shows like "arctic air" or "native wisdom" peices.
  3. It is one of the few areas of canada, as i understand it, that still has serious issues with homosexuality, with evolution, and other non science thinking because of the heavy conservative nature of those who can stand teh winters, coupled with indigenous views.
  4. Women's rights, issues matter there. There are no abortion clinics, or example, in NT. Course, there are only like 2 medical clinics in the whole damn place, hehe. but seroiusy....

Green mowse.pngGodot The ablity to breath is such an overrated ability 21:32, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, particularly so with Nunavut.Civic CatTalk to Civic Cat 21:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Write a decent RWish article on Nunavut and it might survive. The article we had was crap. SophieWilderModerator 11:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Never said it should or shoulnd't survive. said there are reasons why articles like this can be useful at RW. My point, as always, is for writers to think "what does this have to do with mission", cause almost everything *could* be on mission. but if the article sucks, it sucks. worth a vote, right?Green mowse.pngGodot The ablity to breath is such an overrated ability 16:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)