Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2017-06-09/In the media


 * The naming of this article after a transphobic and anti-feminist meme leaves a sour taste, especially given the English Wikipedia's history of hostility to trans people. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 14:05, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess we'll have to draw the line somewhere. Maybe your user name could be offensive to people without arms or hearts. Mr Ernie (talk) 15:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I share Arms & Hearts's concern. Even aside from the fact that this particular meme is rather distasteful, internet culture is hyper-transient and hardly universal, meaning that meme references may not be the best choice for Signpost stories. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm also disappointed by the tone-deaf headline used here. You can do better.  75.12.90.111 (talk) 20:11, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Responding to Arms &amp; Hearts, Josh Milburn, and the IP: As the author of the title here, I must confess I had no idea it could have negative implications.  I certainly only meant it to be humorous; my knowledge of the term comes from a sarcastic teenage son.  I'll try to Google better next time (and consider Josh's point about adapting memes).--Milowent • hasspoken  17:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Response to Wikipedia has cancer : the response is ludicrous: Wikipedia is not about "profit margins" indeed WMF does not have "profits" it has excess of income over expenditure.  And despite Guy's (not unreasonable) concern that the expenditure line may cross the income line at some point, the main concern, I think, its that the money is used well. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:37, 10 June 2017 (UTC).


 * A distinction without a difference. We all agree that the WMF has too much money, has wasted money already, and will likely waste more in the future. Money can be very corrupting. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 03:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)