Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:The only change I made which is very major was switching a few sentences in the lede so that facts about the use of the word came before opinions about it being offensive or not. In general I think that's a good policy. For instance an article on Richard Nixon should start out saying when he was president and other facts and then in the next paragraph talk about the controversy over Watergate, etc. I'm not saying it has to be that way, but I think it makes it easier for readers to get some background info first before controversy is introduced. How can you understand the controversy without that? ] (]) 16:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
:The only change I made which is very major was switching a few sentences in the lede so that facts about the use of the word came before opinions about it being offensive or not. In general I think that's a good policy. For instance an article on Richard Nixon should start out saying when he was president and other facts and then in the next paragraph talk about the controversy over Watergate, etc. I'm not saying it has to be that way, but I think it makes it easier for readers to get some background info first before controversy is introduced. How can you understand the controversy without that? ] (]) 16:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
:::What issues do you have with the changes Cirt? they all look very constructive to me and even cumulatively don't seem to constitute as "major changes". ] (]) 16:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Revision as of 16:07, 9 November 2010
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Moonie (nickname) redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
This sentence was taken out: "In 2008 the Calgary Herald commented on the decline of Unification Church membership in Canada, saying: "In fact, there don't seem to be any Moonies anymore; at least, you never hear about them." It seems to me that it gives an insight into the development of the use of the word in Canada. Of course the article would survive without it, but still I think it gives some insight into the history of "Moonie." Borock (talk) 07:24, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
I put it in because, for one thing it shows the use of the word "Moonie" in Canada and it also shows the decline in the use of the word as the Unification Church is getting less media coverage in recent years. It is also from a very respected newspaper. Kitfoxxe (talk) 14:06, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Some of the more trivial examples have been removed. I like this one since it is more recent and gives an example beyond the US and UK. Kitfoxxe (talk) 16:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
The only change I made which is very major was switching a few sentences in the lede so that facts about the use of the word came before opinions about it being offensive or not. In general I think that's a good policy. For instance an article on Richard Nixon should start out saying when he was president and other facts and then in the next paragraph talk about the controversy over Watergate, etc. I'm not saying it has to be that way, but I think it makes it easier for readers to get some background info first before controversy is introduced. How can you understand the controversy without that? Wolfview (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
