Talk:Condescend

Confusing redirect
Shouldn't this be about the emotion/state of mind? 69.27.76.30 (talk) 00:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes. Now someone wants to restore the confusing redirect. --Vuo (talk) 17:16, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Dicdef?
It doesn't seem to me to be a dicdef.

- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 15:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Its not on multiple distinct definitions of the title
 * it's a stub which has possibility of expansion in encyclopedic ways; it's not a dicdef just because it's currently short
 * plenty of other articles contain little more than a definition and some small amount of discussion, if the same standard for 'dicdef' then a large number of articles would disappear. I don't think that's what 'dicdef' means to most people.


 * I agree with Wolfkeeper and I support his removal of the dicdef tag. This article in its present form is only four months old and, given time, could grow into a more substantial article.


 * In WP:Civility there is now explicit mention of condescending language as one example of the kinds of incivility that should be avoided when editing Wikipedia. Hopefully Wikipedians will become progressively more conscious of condescension, all the various forms of condescension, and the value in avoiding all of them.  Hopefully condescension will become more than just a dictionary definition. Dolphin51 (talk) 23:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)