Talk:Self-deprecation

self "depreciation"
Someone changed this article to "self depreciation". I see now it has been (rightfully) changed back. But to clear this up for anyone who may have had any doubts, I want to reiterate: Self deprecation is the common term. The only Google results I could find for self "depreciation" are about some kind of psychological condition, and a few message board posts where people apparently meant to type "deprecation". See also the Google Fight link for this. 71.35.143.8 (talk) 15:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The person who changed it to self-depreciation was correct. First consider the meaning of deprecate and depreciate.
 * deprecate:
 * 1.	to express earnest disapproval of.
 * 2.	to urge reasons against; protest against (a scheme, purpose, etc.).
 * 3.	to depreciate; belittle.
 * 4.	Archaic. to pray for deliverance from.
 * depreciate:
 * 1. To lessen the price or value of.
 * 2. To think or speak of as being of little worth; belittle.
 * Based on the definitions of these words, self-deprecating should be the mental condition since it means "self-hate" and self-depreciating should be the type of humor in which you belittle yourself. Historical usage also confirms this. Until the late 19th century self-depreciating was the standard form. dictionary.com actually has a usage note that explains the mistaken origins of self-deprecation. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should adhere to the most correct English, even if common usage had distorted the meaning of self-deprecation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.0.248 (talk) 18:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Based on the definitions of these words, self-deprecating should be the mental condition since it means "self-hate" and self-depreciating should be the type of humor in which you belittle yourself. Historical usage also confirms this. Until the late 19th century self-depreciating was the standard form. dictionary.com actually has a usage note that explains the mistaken origins of self-deprecation. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should adhere to the most correct English, even if common usage had distorted the meaning of self-deprecation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.0.248 (talk) 18:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Based on the definitions of these words, self-deprecating should be the mental condition since it means "self-hate" and self-depreciating should be the type of humor in which you belittle yourself. Historical usage also confirms this. Until the late 19th century self-depreciating was the standard form. dictionary.com actually has a usage note that explains the mistaken origins of self-deprecation. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should adhere to the most correct English, even if common usage had distorted the meaning of self-deprecation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.0.248 (talk) 18:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * As noted at NOTDICDEF, Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. The common usage, "self-deprecation", should be the title and the term used throughout the article. Gsf (talk) 19:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe you are misrepresenting NOTDICDEF. A dictionary entry is no more prescriptive than a mathematics entry that explains the limits of a theorem's applicability: so the article would still be descriptive. Second, the subject of this article is still the actual humor, not about the correct word for it. But I learned recently that self-deprecating outnumbers self-depreciating 50:1. Self-depreciating is still more correct--and deserves mention--but self-deprecating seems to have permanently invaded on the other's meaning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.0.248 (talk) 22:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No matter your thoughts, the term is self-deprecation. While you can certainly find appearances of "self-depreciation", and perhaps it was the preferred variety in the past, it is nowadays a very uncommon variation considered to be an error by most. To argue it merits inclusion because it's "more correct" is against WP:NPOV and especially WP:NOTDICDEF. Most importantly, keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a usage guide! To be clear: this article is not about the word itself nor its usage; leave that for a dictionary. The modern term is self-deprecation and that is what the article should use throughout. GhostOfNoMeme (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Can we remove "or – better –" because it seems unsubstantiated and just like someone's preference. Blackladyv (talk) 03:01, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

real negatives vs. purported negatives
Self-deprecating humor purports to be self critical, but sometimes the "negative" that is pointed out is not so negative. For example "oh, my skin is so white I can't get a tan", in a culture where whiteness is generally seen to confer status is an example of self-deprecating humor that is not (to borrow a term from above) self-depreciating. 71.190.66.244 (talk) 19:10, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

entire article flawed
Self-deprecation is not solely a form a humor, yet this article speaks of it as if it is. That's a critical flaw. I'm fixing it. Fourthcourse (talk) 06:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Splitting
As self-deprecation does not seem to simply be a form of comedy, perhaps it would be productive to split the pages as this subject amasses more content, adding a header similar to the one on the Hmannan Yazawin page. E.G. "This article is about the comedy technique. See Self-deprecation (Psychology) for an article about the general psychological term." I am not at all an expert in comedy, so I will leave the details to such experts. 98.81.1.151 (talk) 00:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.corebrand.com/views/562-louis-ck-and-the-human-side-of-business
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 17:31, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Example
This could use a good one. 184.44.0.128 (talk) 19:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Criticisms?
The criticisms sections on this article is ridiculous. There are no citations and the link to the seven deadly vices doesn't make any sense. Who are the "many" who think it is a character flaw? The section sounds like someone's personal opinion on the subject.Smithj18 (talk) 09:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

If no one objects, I think the Criticisms section should be deleted entirely and I'm going to go ahead and do that in a couple days unless someone can provide some citations. Smithj18 (talk) 01:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Here's one citation - a positive one. 75.155.53.29 (talk) 16:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Give us more. Or maybe the Criticisms section should be removed? OhWhyNot (talk) 02:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You know what, edits are undo on Wikipedia, so I'll remove the "Criticism" section. It honestly makes no sense without an honest source. OhWhyNot (talk) 02:44, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

edit
Self-deprecation is often perceived as being a characteristic of certain nations, such as Great Britain, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand, where "blowing one's own trumpet" is frowned upon.

So there are nations that are do not value self deprecation? Which ones? You should have a source since you claim certain nations i.e. only examples given are European when you have civilizations that have been around for 4-5 000 years and surely must have been somewhat modest (Chinese, Indian, Persian, Egyptian, Mesopotamian, etc. The irony is, when you claim certain nations are excessively modest, you are contradicting yourself by 'blowing their trumpet' for them when they in fact trying to avoid this and that is the whole point.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.143.139 (talk) 01:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Merge self-deprecation and self-hatred
Both are basically synonymous, the former being simply a $20 word and the latter one in a 5-cent-word. For example, many discussions of the "self-hating Jew" stereotype use the term "self-deprecation". Of course, one may split hairs and say that self-deprecation is an external expression of self-hatred, but the essence is the same. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

By the way, merge will beneficial, because both articles are in poor shape. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Some overlap, but distinct. Self hatred is never good natured and always serious. Self deprecation can be serious, but is often exaggerated for humorous effect. 202.81.249.172 (talk) 16:56, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


 * The terms and concepts are distinct, and should not be conflated. The presence or absence of humor is a critical difference, as pointed out earlier. The corresponding articles should not be merged, but improved separately. Reify-tech (talk) 17:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Self-deprecation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120120031057/http://www.sietar.org.uk/publications/articles/55-the-funny-thing-about-work to http://www.sietar.org.uk/publications/articles/55-the-funny-thing-about-work

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:11, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Unauthorized/undiscussed merge
Somebody has unilaterally merged the articles Self-deprecation and Self-hatred improperly, without following the standard Wikipedia WP:MERGE protocol for open discussion before a proposed merge. The Self-deprecation article appears to have been truncated and stuffed into a sub-subsection of the Self-hatred article.

The Self-deprecation article should either be split out or reconstituted afresh, rather than its current status as a WP:REDIRECT to a sub-subsection of a different article. Reify-tech (talk) 17:17, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that these are two close, but different subjects. Self-deprecation does not necessarily involve self-hatred.See also Talk:Self-hatred for a yet another editor's opinion. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:41, 7 August 2019 (UTC)