Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Online shaming

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 14 March 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): KatieHinrichs.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EXAMPLE FARM

[edit]

This article contains too many examples. As per WP:EXAMPLEFARM. I think we should cull them down to half a dozen prominent examples, at most. Bacondrum (talk) 03:09, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'm proposing removing at minimum any that don't have their own article or involve people who already were notable. Anyone who isn't notable is silly to include when we have multiple examples that explain the issue, which is the point of giving examples. We don't need a comprehensive list of every incident of internet shaming that ever was mentioned in the media. valereee (talk) 15:45, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've done so. There are still probably more than we need, so let's discuss before adding anything back. valereee (talk) 16:36, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Justine Sacco incident is linked from elsewhere on wikipedia. Here, for instance. 92.236.132.236 (talk) 11:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I've removed that broken link. Valereee (talk) 12:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I added sources to the "Negative reviews" section, as well as references. Not examples, just references for the examples in the article. Maher Chas (talk) 20:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, absolutely. One should ask: does example X adds anything to understand better the subject? Or perhaps the example was misleading? Right now almost every scandal includes multiple people commenting online. Does it mean it belongs here? At the very least, we must follow sources. Do we have RS saying that an example X was "online shaming" or it was indeed an obvious online shaming campaign. And even if an example was included, it should focus on the subject, i.e. online shaming, rather than debating at length if someone was a good or a bad person. My very best wishes (talk) 21:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does Cringe Culture count as Online Shaming?

[edit]

As the title says, is does it really count? I've seen people reviewing this kind of internet culture as online shaming. Anyone who participated in Cringe Culture got called out for doxxing which it (doxxing) is a method of Online Shaming. Kurt R. 12:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Mary Bale has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 24 § Mary Bale until a consensus is reached. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:23, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]