Talk:McRepublic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's fair its use in the same way a "banana Republic" is just a term widely explained and used in the Wikipedia.

American citizens should not be censoring the wikipedia for what they think is proper or not. Wikipedia is a global community.

What is "national" attack in a globalized world anyway?

user:Pascaweb

I deleted this, not because of POV concerns, but because it looks like a protologism. I only show 17 google hits for this term. If there's evidence it's in wide usage, we could have an article on this concept, but I see no such evidence so far. Friday (talk) 17:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I also googled on the Spanish form, McRepublica which has very few hits also. This looks like a not-widely-used term. Compare this to "Banana Republic" which was coined by a famous writer and has been in wide use for many years now. Friday (talk) 17:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Friday, I understand your motifs since is a neologism with a clear pejorative meaning to north-americans that I found interesting to expose in wikipedia and we must to follow the proper procedure to discuss it and clear it. Immidiate deletion it's not the proper procedure. The criteria of 17 google results is not fair since I find wide evidence in printed press. At the end of the day you can delete it but you certainly can not delete what is in the mind of million of people. And my intention is not to offend nor increase hatred in the world ... greetings. user:Pascaweb

I care way less about "proper procedure" than I do about producing a high-quality encyclopedia. Being an encyclopedia means that verifiability is an absolute minimum requirement for an article. However if you really want me to, I'll undo the deletion and list this on Afd. I don't see how it stands any chance at all, though. Friday (talk) 17:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I dont think using "prevent recreation" is fair since I can tell this is a term with increasing use in LatinAmerica. This ís a classical example of lack of respect to NPOV. User:Pascaweb

It's not actually protected, it just says it is. This has nothing to do with NPOV, this has to do with verifiability. If usage of this term is really increasing, perhaps in a few years it will become verifiable. Friday (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

verifiability is the only issue here? You just must read papers to verify it! By the way, writer O Henry is only famous in United States if you haven't noticed it. Another classic example of what McCitizens think about the world. Maybe some day banana-citizens will use it and include it in the US-regional dictionary. User:Pascaweb

Please. I'm not here to talk politics, and nobody else should be, either. This is an encyclopedia. If you can produce reliable sources documenting the use of this term, please do so. Otherwise, I don't see that there's anything left to discuss here. Friday (talk) 17:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you arrogant dictator. You're not there to discuss Politics only to erase what you personally think is not right... why not ask for arbitration on this issue? - User:Pascaweb