Oblique Strategies and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hatnote: Difference between pages
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
Neurolysis (talk | contribs) Undid revision 244396687 by Neurolysis (talk) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===[[Hatnote]]=== |
|||
'''Oblique Strategies''' (subtitled ''over one hundred worthwhile dilemmas'') is a set of published cards created by [[Brian Eno]] and [[Peter Schmidt (artist)|Peter Schmidt]] first published in 1975, and now in its fifth edition. Each card contains a phrase or cryptic remark which can be used to break a deadlock or dilemma situation. |
|||
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|W}} |
|||
:{{la|Hatnote}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Hatnote|wpReason={{urlencode: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hatnote]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hatnote|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 October 8#{{anchorencode:Hatnote}}|View log]])</noinclude> |
|||
Examples: |
|||
Internal wikipedia term, doesn't warrant an article by itself. <font face="Trebuchet MS"><b>— [[User:Neurolysis|neuro]]</b><sup><i>[[User talk:Neurolysis|(talk)]]</i></sup></font> 23:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*State the problem in words as clearly as possible. |
|||
*'''Delete''' via [[WP:DICDEF]] [[User:Pharmboy|P<small><strong>HARMBOY</strong></small>]] ([[User talk:Pharmboy|<small><strong>TALK</strong></small>]]) 23:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*Only one element of each kind. |
|||
*'''Have converted it to redirect''': as I created the article in its current form (it was previously a redirect to [[Footnote]], not useful). It now redirects to [[Wikipedia:Hatnote]] (or will, once the AfD template is removed). This was suggested on talk page, and I think I intended to implement it at the time but forgot to do so. I believe we need to have '''something''' at this title, (a) to be helpful to people, perhaps new editors or people baffled by talk-page messages, who look it up, and (b) to reduce the risk of something less useful being created at the title. A redirect straight to [[WP:HAT]] seems the most useful thing to have at this WP-specific word, so I ask for it to be allowed to continue to exist - even if we have to invoke [[WP:IAR]] for this useful solution! When the dust settles I'll make similar redirects from "Hat-note" and "Hat note" for good measure. [[User:PamD|PamD]] ([[User talk:PamD|talk]]) 07:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*What would your closest friend do? |
|||
**A new [[Wikipedia:cross-namespace redirect|cross-namespace redirect]] will most likely be deleted, for the very reasons that this article was nominated in the first place. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] ([[User talk:Uncle G|talk]]) 14:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*What to increase? What to reduce? |
|||
***It will indeed no doubt be brought to AfD again under this. <font face="Trebuchet MS"><b>— [[User:Neurolysis|neuro]]</b><sup><i>[[User talk:Neurolysis|(talk)]]</i></sup></font> 15:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*Are there sections? Consider transitions. |
|||
*'''Redirect''' to [[Wikipedia:Hatnote]], as I suggested on [[Talk:Hatnote]]. [[User:Sesshomaru|Lord Sesshomaru]] <small>([[User talk:Sesshomaru|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Sesshomaru|edits]])</small> 18:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*Try faking it! |
|||
*'''Comment''' I was of the understanding that changing an article to a redirect during an AFD is a STRONG no-no, and undermines the entire process. If the concensus decides that is what is best, fine, but doing such a drastic measure pre-close is pretty much saying that everyone elses opinion is meaningless. [[User:Pharmboy|P<small><strong>HARMBOY</strong></small>]] ([[User talk:Pharmboy|<small><strong>TALK</strong></small>]]) 18:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*Honour the error as a hidden intention. |
|||
From the introduction to the 2001 edition: |
|||
<blockquote>These cards evolved from separate observations of the principles underlying what we were doing. Sometimes they were recognised in retrospect (intellect catching up with intuition), sometimes they were identified as they were happening, sometimes they were formulated. |
|||
They can be used as a pack, or by drawing a single card from the shuffled pack when a dilemma occurs in a working situation. In this case the card is trusted even if its appropriateness is quite unclear...</blockquote> |
|||
==Pop culture references== |
|||
{{Trivia|date=November 2007}} |
|||
Oblique Strategies was mentioned in the 1998 [[R.E.M. (band)|R.E.M.]] song "Diminished" off the album ''[[Up (R.E.M. album)|Up]]''. |
|||
In the film ''[[Slacker (film)|Slacker]]'', a character offers passers-by cards from an Oblique Strategies deck. Strategies mentioned are "Honor thy error as a hidden intention," "Look closely at the most embarrassing details and amplify," "Not building a wall; making a brick," "Repetition is a form of change," and the one which came to be seen as a summary of the film's ethos (though it was not part of the official set of Oblique Strategies), "Withdrawing in disgust is not the same thing as apathy." (This line was quoted in R.E.M.'s song "[[What's The Frequency, Kenneth?]]") |
|||
[[Blixa Bargeld]] has a similar navigation system, called Dave. |
|||
All five editions are now available in the Appstore for the iPhone and iTouch. |
|||
==External links== |
|||
*[http://www.rtqe.net/ObliqueStrategies/ The Oblique Strategies] |
|||
*[http://tools.blackhat-seo.com/strategies/ Random Strategies] A script that displays a random phrase from an Oblique Strategies deck |
|||
<!-- |
|||
Please do not re-add Questionable Content webcomic link as it adds no important information about the topic of the article. Please see the following two sections: |
|||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Trivia_sections |
|||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:''not''#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information |
|||
--> |
|||
[[Category:Brian Eno]] |
|||
[[pt:Estratégias oblíquas]] |
|||
Revision as of 20:20, 10 October 2008
Hatnote
- Hatnote (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Internal wikipedia term, doesn't warrant an article by itself. — neuro(talk) 23:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete via WP:DICDEF PHARMBOY (TALK) 23:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Have converted it to redirect: as I created the article in its current form (it was previously a redirect to Footnote, not useful). It now redirects to Wikipedia:Hatnote (or will, once the AfD template is removed). This was suggested on talk page, and I think I intended to implement it at the time but forgot to do so. I believe we need to have something at this title, (a) to be helpful to people, perhaps new editors or people baffled by talk-page messages, who look it up, and (b) to reduce the risk of something less useful being created at the title. A redirect straight to WP:HAT seems the most useful thing to have at this WP-specific word, so I ask for it to be allowed to continue to exist - even if we have to invoke WP:IAR for this useful solution! When the dust settles I'll make similar redirects from "Hat-note" and "Hat note" for good measure. PamD (talk) 07:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- A new cross-namespace redirect will most likely be deleted, for the very reasons that this article was nominated in the first place. Uncle G (talk) 14:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect to Wikipedia:Hatnote, as I suggested on Talk:Hatnote. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- Comment I was of the understanding that changing an article to a redirect during an AFD is a STRONG no-no, and undermines the entire process. If the concensus decides that is what is best, fine, but doing such a drastic measure pre-close is pretty much saying that everyone elses opinion is meaningless. PHARMBOY (TALK) 18:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)