Talk:Fallacy of quoting out of context
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Merge and redirect with contextomy
The contextomy entry overlaps this entry. The word "contextomy" is a scientific-sounding replacement for the commonly-used "out of context," but both wikipedia entries refer to exactly the same concept. Since "taken out of context" returns over 1,000,000 google hits while "contextomy" returns only 429 (many of which are mirrors), preferring "contextomy" is linguistic prescription. --67.10.163.122 17:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Don't disagree though I would rename the whole article to Quoting out of context. Fallacy seems POV. Regan123 17:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- "POV"? Well, it is defined as a logical fallacy. Are you saying that the definition is POV, too? :)
- But I agree, the name "quoting out of context" rings better and is more "canonical" (that is, can be linked in more contexts without a pipe) -- intgr 23:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- It is a logical fallacy, but some may misunderstand and maybe I'm just being fussy :-). If two can make consensus then we have it on quoting out of context. Let me know if you need a hand with the merge. Cheers, Regan123 00:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Merge. They are articles about the exact same subject. Furthermore, the diatribe at the beginning of contextomy is unencyclopedic nonsense (and is nearly self referential). The term "out of context" clearly means "in a context that sufficiently different form the original context to be misleading." This stuff about how every quote is out of context is equivocation.— Randall Bart 01:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- It is a logical fallacy, but some may misunderstand and maybe I'm just being fussy :-). If two can make consensus then we have it on quoting out of context. Let me know if you need a hand with the merge. Cheers, Regan123 00:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)