Should we post another bulletin in ATT and wait a few days?
It probably wouldn't hurt, but it looks like the only one that doesn't have at least ten votes has a strongly negative ratio, and thus probably isn't going to be changed anyway.
Actually, those votes came after Imp plugged it in ATT just earlier today. Earlier, everything was in the 8 and 9's.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallBump for votes, since I think 15 is usually the consensus range, and not everything has that many votes. That said, a lot of the options that have under 15 votes are still overwhelmingly in favor of merging.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 19th 2021 at 5:07:45 AM
I got a rock for Halloween.Not yet. Sometimes they show up after I simply bump.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallCalling the crowner: Among the pages listed on it (i.e with between 10 and 100 wicks), consensus is to merge Anecdotal Fallacy, Appeal to Consequences, Appeal to Fear, Appeal to Ignorance, Appeal to Pity, Appeal to Ridicule, Appeal to Wealth, Argumentum Ad Nauseam, Bandwagon Fallacy, Begging the Question, Converse Error, Fallacy Fallacy, Fallacy of Composition, Fallacy of Division, Human Nature Fallacy, Loaded Words, Non Sequitur Fallacy, Proof by Examples, Prosecutor's Fallacy, Reverse Slippery Slope Fallacy, Semantic Slippery Slope Fallacy, Shifting the Burden of Proof, Sound/Valid/True, Special Pleading, Spotlight Fallacy and Strawman Fallacy.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanI'll work on a sandbox for the useful notes page over the next couple days. I guess it's up to everyone else if we want to start dewicking now or wait until there's something to replace wicks with, but I'd appreciate it if we didn't cut or redirect anything before I have the chance to copy stuff over to the sandbox.
Ok, I have a sandbox page up. Everyone here is invited to look at it and critique it. I didn't include anything under an "examples" or "looks like this fallacy but isn't" heading because I don't want people to think it's a trope page or for it to be too long. I also merged Argumentum Ad Lapidem into the Appeal to Ridicule folder because the description on that page is really anemic.
Also, I think that instead of merging Sound/Valid/True into this page, we should move it to Useful Notes as is.
I am not sure what purpose moving Sound/Valid/True to Useful Notes would serve. Perhaps it's my concerns about the proliferation of low-relevance pages in that namespace showing, but it seems pointless to me.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanIf this is going to be a separate page, the quote and the description need to be changed (or removed in the former's case) on either the new page or the main Logical Fallacies index. Currently, they're either exactly the same or close to it.
If we're using this text for the new page and changing the index's text, the latter should probably have a sandbox of its own.
I got a rock for Halloween.Seems like all of the ones we agreed on are merged? I don't see any problems with the sandbox, except for maybe the description as stated above. Are we fine with dewicking now?
Currently mostly inactive. An incremental game I tested: https://galaxy.click/play/176 (Gods of Incremental)I think it's safe to just put the sandbox in place and shorten the description of the main Logical Fallacies page (since most of what's in its description now will be going on the new page), then turn the merged fallacy pages into redirects to the new page.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Sep 25th 2021 at 7:47:34 AM
I got a rock for Halloween.
Crown Description:
Logical Fallacies is an index with a lot of stub pages in it. Should they be merged?
