Talk:Shoop (disambiguation)

Untitled
Okay, this is getting silly. I happened to notice that "shoop" -- a commonly-used piece of Internet slang for "photoshopped" as verified by both UrbanDictionary and a Google search -- was not listed on Wikipedia. Given that lots of other Internet slang is listed, I added the additional definition to the shoop disambiguation page. It was reverted by user:Sesshomaru, who said it needed a citation. I've never seen a citation on a disambiguation page, but given that he insisted on repeatedly reverting it, I went and found a citation from a scientific website in which the term "shoop" was used to refer to the growing phenomenon of scientific dishonesty using digital photo-editing. This citation was removed with the admonition that citations are not used on disambiguation pages. Now user:Sesshomaru has reverted it AGAIN as a result of it not having a citation. Since the word "shoop" IS a commonly-used Internet slang word, what is necessary to get it added here? SmashTheState (talk) 13:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You know what? I've discovered I really don't care.  It's a miniscule, completely uncontroversial edit, and the denizens of Wikipedia have managed, as usual, to turn it into some kind of Sisyphian struggle.  THIS is why Wikipedia is dying, and that 25%+ of all traffic (and growing) is now dedicated solely to Wikipedia bureaucracy.  Casual contributors are made to feel as if they're sticking their faces into a steam-powered cheese grater so that a bunch of socially dysfunctional autists can lord it over an increasingly irrelevant kingdom of Byzantine rules and bureaucracy for the greater glory of King Jimbo.  So, in short: you win.  The article will remain unfixed and you may go back to arguing about Dragonball Z or whatever the hell it is you people do. SmashTheState (talk) 07:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits
This is not "fine". The article doesn't even make a reference to the dab term. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you guys agree to something here without dancing around in circles on the article? If you keep it up, I'm going to lock the page. I haven't yet because I'm hoping that we can get some productivity here. Sound good? :P Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  01:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If the other two editors aren't willing to comply, I'd prefer to see the page locked. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:24, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Locking it isn't a problem; I could probably go train a chimp to do that for me. But I don't think it's necessary because we're all mature and civilized people here. We can settle this without making the temptation physically impossible to reach. Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  02:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Whatever seems best I suppose. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There is some serious OCD going on here. I think User:SmashTheState has provided ample evidence for 'shoop' being a word used for 'photoshopped'. He has even cited evidence. What are the objections exactly?MiltonP Ottawa (talk) 09:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What "evidence" do you see here? In order to warrant inclusion, the dab term has to be referenced. That's all. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There is plenty of evidence. Urban Dictionary This for example.MiltonP Ottawa (talk) 09:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

photoshopping
i put it back in, mostly as a statement of intent. it seems that what is required to keep it on this disambig page is to get it in the photo manipulation article, as a close synonym for "photoshopping", then placing it here follows. is this correct? i'd like to know what's required to satisfy editors with an interest in this issue, rather than have a heated debate--Mongreilf (talk) 09:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Find a reference, add it to the article that mentions it, then (and only then) you may re-place that entry. Simple as that. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's what I suggested, but please remember be polite--Mongreilf (talk) 22:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Read up on WP:ASSUME before performing stunts like this again. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in WP:MOSDAB or WP:DAB that requires references anywhere or mention in the target article. Relevant advice therefrom  includes "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might use the "Go button", there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead."  "Add a link only if the article's subject (or the relevant subtopic thereof) could plausibly be referred to by essentially the same name as the disambiguated term in a sufficiently generic context."  Consensus on the talk page and on the article seems to be that photo manipulation is a reasonable disambiguation.  I agree, and will restore it soon if there is no rule or consensus based objection.John Z (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia:MoS:DP mentions mentioning, describing how pages which mention terms should be linked, but it does not say that disambiguated terms must be mentioned in the target article. So I restored the link.John Z (talk) 11:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Internet site
What Aboutthe internet site "Shoop da whoop.com"? Isnt that relatted? here is a link. http://www.Shoop-da-whoop.com/ Conkern65 (talk) 18:10, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Shoop (song) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)