Talk:In Popular Culture

Incorrect redirect

It seems to me that this is an incorrect redirect. "In Popular Culture" is specifically a phenomenon of Wikipedia itself.

• There should be a page for it. Also, can anyone explain why this page was previously deleted and protected? Or why it's the only talk page I can find which automatically redirects to the talk page of another article? Is there a reason people aren't supposed to talk about this redirect?

Realisticradical (talk) 03:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

There is a page for this: Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles, why isn't the redirect to there? —The imp (talk) 10:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Cross-namespace redirects are frowned upon by current Wikipedia practices. This is because the article namespace and the project namespace serve logically separate purposes. --Allen3 ^talk 11:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. The term is notable only in Wikipedia's use of it, and we're meant to avoid self-references. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can tell from the avoid self references guideline pages on the culture of wikipedia are accepted. WP:WAWI In popular culture pages are a wikipedia phenomenon similar to fancruft. Perhaps a page on the use of In_popular_culture sections should be created in Wikipedia:In_popular_culture and this page should be redirected to there. Realisticradical (talk) 15:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Please read the replies above. There already is a page on the issue: Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles. This page does not redirect here because Wikipedia's project namespace should not be linked from the main encyclopedia. Both of these positions have solid community consensus. if you think that an article describing Wikipedia's pop culture referencing fetish would be both reliably sourced and verifiable then please try creating one in your userspace and then bringing it to the attention of the community to decide whether it belongs in the article namespace. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha. Well that makes sense. The policy seems counter intuitive to me leading to thinks like Fancruft redirecting to a completely irrelevant page as far as I can tell from the page itself. There's an interesting little debate about it relating to NPOV. Realisticradical (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, I think that conversation is more of a wikidpia-wide policy issue than a specific problem with this instance. Maybe the talk page for WP:Redirect could be a decent place for that chat? (I have other examples in mind, where I disagree with the appropriateness of the redirect) X-Kal (talk) 01:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay... I'm curious about the redirect change - I was really impressed to see someone come up with Wikipedia_in_culture as an option for this. When you put the xkcd jokes aside for a bit and try to look at it as a serious thing, it suddenly makes a lot of sense to link it in this way. The only reason the phrase "In Popular Culture" has any kind of notability is because of its use in wikipedia - redirecting it to the already-existing Wikipedia in Culture article seems to follow guidelines, as well. Perhaps we should consider using that as the redirect article, and not just the generic Popular Culture article? X-Kal (talk) 02:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

It it illogical that an article titled "in popular culture" should redirect to "Wikipedia in popular culture" when the word "Wikipedia" is not included in the original search. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Please stop blanking out this page

There was never a consensus on the redirect, and this constant blanking the talk page out, without leaving a reasonable note for redirecting the topic to a more appropriate location, is simply unacceptable. X-Kal (talk) 05:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

"Never consensus"? The article is less than 36 hours old and existed only because of the kind of fanboy incursion that happens every time xkcd or Stephen Colbert or whoever mentions Wikipedia. one would suggest that if the page is "constantly" blanked that there is in fact no consensus to keep it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

No, that just indicates a consensus among one person that it shouldn't be kept. X-Kal (talk) 15:29, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It was deleted at AfD. BJ^Talk 15:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

So, having read the Article for Deletion, where was the redirect discussed? I guess I don't understand where or why that decision was made. X-Kal (talk) 01:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It was deleted then the page restored and redirected by User:Sweecoo. I', not where else it could be redirected to. BJ^Talk 02:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Redirection seems reasonable. Redirecting to Popular culture (which it is doing now) seems a good idea. Popular culture studies would be another good place. Cultural studies would also be plausible, but inferior to each of the former, as it is more general. GRBerry 13:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The bottom line

If this is to be anything but a redirect, then there need to be some kind of sources for the article other than Wikipedia navel-gazing. -- SCZenz (talk) 16:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 June 2013

I believe that this article can be used to reference the "In popular culture" section of some wikipedia articles.

Quisss (talk) 03:27, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. :) Actually, you're not quite asking this in the right place. This is the page to discuss changes to this specific article. For changes that would impact a large number of pages, you need to post at a more central discussion board. I recommend starting a new section at Wikipedia:Village pump/Proposals. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)