This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Robert Fisk article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | A news item involving Robert Fisk was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 5 November 2020. | ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
Consider the following:
The blogosphere term fisking Word detective, 2003 refers not to what Fisk does but to what is done to him, and others; the fisker begins by copying text from the fiskee, and then constructs a point-by-point criticism of the text.
Can somebody kindly produce a reliable source for the terms "fisker" and "fiskee"? I note that Andrew Sullivan's original "fisking" was not a point-by-point rebuttal but instead a familiar, short three paragraph attack. The formatting of Sullivan's criticism fails to meet the definition outlined above. Indeed, I can't find a single "fisking" of Robert Fisk anyplace (lots of random criticism, yes, but nothing that can accurately be described as a "fisking"). Perhaps this needs rewording. Wikispan ( talk) 01:11, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Nevertheless: the one line remark about "Fisking" is wrong-- this was a dig against Fisk that came out of the Iraq war era of "war bloggers", who fancied themselves capable of demolishing opponents with responses based on detailed quotations. It was publicized (if not invented) by Eric S. Raymond, who insisted on injecting his opinions into his "Jargon File" and pretending they were representative of the entire community of programmers. "It's time for me to give him a thorough fisking" meant "I am going to take him down just like Sullivan did Fisk."
You cant find "authoritative sources" on this because it's all from the world of armchair warrior war bloggers. It probably belongs in a footnote about internet culture, it doesn't belong in the lede. 2600:1700:5B20:15A0:2711:A0DB:D6A1:5807 ( talk) 19:56, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
An IP user deleted the Fisking section of the article. While I think some mention of the term should be included I'm not sure whether the whole section should be reinstated and was wondering what everyone else thinks. Should the section be reinstated or not? Mrmatiko ( talk) 09:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
I also got here via "Fisking". Why delete Wikipedia's only explanation of this notable internet term, which has its origin in this notable person? "There is simply no indication of significant notability" -- there are 864k results for "fisking" on Google! (More than "borking", which has a significant section in Robert Bork's article, as it should!) Congrats Wikipedia scolds, your quest to eliminate eponyms is... succeeding inconsistently? Brw12 ( talk) 21:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
It belongs in a footnote about internet blogger culture and Fisk, it's not at all central enough to go in the lede.
The issue, the reason discussions of "Fisking" have always been contentious is it's an insult made up by one faction, so the question is, is it in any way "neutral" to help them promote this insult, to make it seem as though there's something authoritative about it? 2600:1700:5B20:15A0:2711:A0DB:D6A1:5807 ( talk) 20:00, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
a Truss-essay, or Trussay, you could say — billed in the UK media as the launch of a political comeback
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Robert Fisk article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | A news item involving Robert Fisk was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 5 November 2020. | ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
Consider the following:
The blogosphere term fisking Word detective, 2003 refers not to what Fisk does but to what is done to him, and others; the fisker begins by copying text from the fiskee, and then constructs a point-by-point criticism of the text.
Can somebody kindly produce a reliable source for the terms "fisker" and "fiskee"? I note that Andrew Sullivan's original "fisking" was not a point-by-point rebuttal but instead a familiar, short three paragraph attack. The formatting of Sullivan's criticism fails to meet the definition outlined above. Indeed, I can't find a single "fisking" of Robert Fisk anyplace (lots of random criticism, yes, but nothing that can accurately be described as a "fisking"). Perhaps this needs rewording. Wikispan ( talk) 01:11, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Nevertheless: the one line remark about "Fisking" is wrong-- this was a dig against Fisk that came out of the Iraq war era of "war bloggers", who fancied themselves capable of demolishing opponents with responses based on detailed quotations. It was publicized (if not invented) by Eric S. Raymond, who insisted on injecting his opinions into his "Jargon File" and pretending they were representative of the entire community of programmers. "It's time for me to give him a thorough fisking" meant "I am going to take him down just like Sullivan did Fisk."
You cant find "authoritative sources" on this because it's all from the world of armchair warrior war bloggers. It probably belongs in a footnote about internet culture, it doesn't belong in the lede. 2600:1700:5B20:15A0:2711:A0DB:D6A1:5807 ( talk) 19:56, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
An IP user deleted the Fisking section of the article. While I think some mention of the term should be included I'm not sure whether the whole section should be reinstated and was wondering what everyone else thinks. Should the section be reinstated or not? Mrmatiko ( talk) 09:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
I also got here via "Fisking". Why delete Wikipedia's only explanation of this notable internet term, which has its origin in this notable person? "There is simply no indication of significant notability" -- there are 864k results for "fisking" on Google! (More than "borking", which has a significant section in Robert Bork's article, as it should!) Congrats Wikipedia scolds, your quest to eliminate eponyms is... succeeding inconsistently? Brw12 ( talk) 21:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
It belongs in a footnote about internet blogger culture and Fisk, it's not at all central enough to go in the lede.
The issue, the reason discussions of "Fisking" have always been contentious is it's an insult made up by one faction, so the question is, is it in any way "neutral" to help them promote this insult, to make it seem as though there's something authoritative about it? 2600:1700:5B20:15A0:2711:A0DB:D6A1:5807 ( talk) 20:00, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
a Truss-essay, or Trussay, you could say — billed in the UK media as the launch of a political comeback