Talk:Short bus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This should be moved to Short bus--generic term/shouldn't be capped. 24.17.48.241 18:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Inflamatory?

What is the purpose of this article? It's not an encyclopedic term (as it isn't an official name), and remember, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. I think this should be deleted- after all, this isn't Urban Dictionary folks.

But can you define "official"? An encyclopedia's purpose is to be able to define anything that people want to know. If this is a commonly used term (and I know it is, because I ride one) then it belongs here. Anyway, Wikipedia is not censored. But if you think that there is excess POV or something like that, or there are too many derogatory terms, feel free to edit it. Thank you. Ilikefood 23:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting tired of people like you, we are trying to have as many articles as possible so anyone looking for any form of information can find it. Wikipedia has information regarding everything, including slang. If there is any scrap of information that could serve as educating others in any form it should probably be here.

Right, the whole appeal of Wikipedia is that it has information that normal encyclopedias don't have.

Bus related article? they sure cover the spread here.24.144.137.244 02:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The end of the article is rather insulting and unnecessary. What purpose does including all of the offensive and slang terms serve? I know that Wikipedia is not censored, but at the same time, we don't go around and add things like "Britney Spears is also somtimes referred to as a "skank, slut, piece of trash," etc. It just seems a little unnecessary and innappropriate. Should we also add "Children sufferring from Down's Syndrome are sometimes called idiots, retards, etc." I certainly hope not. Anybody see my point? Wikipediarules2221 17:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

no

no. This is an article on slang. Yes, in this artcile Wiki is more like a dictionary than in the average article, and I have no problem with that. But being more like a dictionary entry, people looking this up are interested in slang, and listing equivalents is dictionary-like and may be helpful to someone researching slang. Comparatively, calling Britney Spears a slut would not help anyone researching her. As for being insulting, I may find critics' dislike of Yes's album "Topographical Oceans" to be insulting, but I don't erase that information. If anyone chooses to erase this section again, I would ask you to please further defend your reasons. 156.56.193.5 23:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

"Encyclopedic content must be attributable to a reliable source." This means that not only must the information be eruditic, but it also must relate to "facts, truths, or principles, as from study or investigation." Listing a variety of insults has nothing to do with study or investigation. If you care to make this truly informational, then research the history of your insults, cite references, and provide information that would generally be useful to real study on the topic. Until you do so, your "contribution" is geared toward nothing but making a segment of the population feel inferior to you.

Please note the following rule page about the usage of slang on Wikipedia: WP:WINAD

This entire article deals with a slang term and should be removed.

I am fine with that.