Gentle input needed here

M

MeekAndMild

New member
Some very gentle input would be desirable to give the a more balanced viewpoint to the Wikipedia discussion on the politics of guns.

Now if everybody jumps in and starts dancing on their site they're going to be highly upset, but a little kind and caring direction might be in order. Any input should be extremely circumspect and well considered, lest it provoke the gentle Wikipedians to severe backlash. The idea is to correct some of their more blatant falsehoods and reduce their groupthink drift rather than preaching to them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gun_politics

One last warning, anybody who tries to do this needs to thoroughly familiarize themself with the Wikipedia culture before attampting to change anything!
 
He says as he dons flame-retardent suit:

The Wikipedia exposition of "The Way Things Are" seems very clear,logical and well explained to me. It seems to me that hardliners on either side of the gun-control issue could learn something about how the "other side" thinks, and this personal knowledge could conceivably remove some of the paranoia and histrionics inherent when pros and antis discuss the dreaded subject of guns. Personally, I love it when anti-gun friends of long acquaintance "discover" and are horrified by my dark secret,but have to admit that I have committed no violent crimes, and am indeed the same person they were okay with five minutes before they found out I am a gun owner. You are correct- dealings with antis (when necessary) must be handled gently. Flying off the handle only plays into their hands,and to the most excitable,may even seem to be a precursor of the berserk barrage they claim to fear so much. That is the bottom line: both sides are afraid of each other. Antis fear that they or their loved ones will be killed by a gun(ner). WE fear the loss of personal control our firearms represent to us. Tolerance is a key issue here. Not only do we try to convert antis to our way of thinking, they are actively trying to change our minds as well. It`s kind of like evangelizing- if someone is actively opposed to the message, then move on. The time you waste talking to a wall is better used elsewhere. (Climbs down from soapbox...)
 
Exactly. You wouldn't want to go in to that site with all the anger and angst we see here among the young DUers when they visit. But I thought some of the more knowledgable persons here might want to get involved in correcting some of their misconceptions, such as the one about the US being the only western country which allows guns, or perhaps they could discuss the funding sources for the various gun control organizations versus that of the NRA...many opportunities. Many opportunities.
 
Like you mentioned, if you start off with some indisputable facts (presented in a well menaing way), you may be suprised and it may do some good.
 
Seemed surprisingly balanced to me. Usually those kinds of topics on Wikipedia are marked as being highly controversial but this one isn't.
 
One last warning, anybody who tries to do this needs to thoroughly familiarize themself with the Wikipedia culture before attampting to change anything!
Click to expand...
Will somebody please enlighten me as to what the blazes Wikipedia culture is? :confused: The links below talk about an "encyclopedia", but I don't see any mission statement, goals, or anthing like that. (Of course, I could Google it, I suppose, but that would take effort :p :D )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top