Talk:Mgtow

This redirect is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

Disambiguation

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Other notable referent for this term?

MGTOW is not in reference to a blog or any other limited or singular interest. This article explains a social movement that yields 58,300,000 Google Analytics results (as is now referenced in the article). The google database reference shows the significance of this article to the larger populous and that MGTOW is not derived from a limited and singular person or interest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.245.90 (talk) 01:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering about that air craft stuff. Yes, Wikipedia does not like anything to do with men right movement — unless it happens in Japan [Herbivore men] and can be thoroughly ridiculed. --Krischik ^T 17:25, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@71.56....90, Who said anything about "limited or singular interest"? Also, what Google database search? Chrisrus (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you would just search Google Scholar for "MGTOW", you will see many usages to refer to the aeronautical term. There are two notable referents of the term "MGTOW", only one of which has an article. You seem to believe that the other was deleted because of feminist bias, but I glanced at it on the history and the reason seems to have been not that but a complete lack of references. Chrisrus (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC) 206.255.142.119 (talk) 14:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Michael Motes== Protected edit request on 18 December 2014 ==[reply]

Absurd that MGTOW redirects to Maximum Takeoff Weight, there is no G in Maximum. Transparent ludicrous attempt to suppress the MGTOW community. I thought WikiPedia was better than this. You've lost a donator until the editorship wises up.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.142.119 (talk) 14:45, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you say it: There is indeed no G in Maximum Takeoff Weight. And anyway: They could have made it a disambiguation page. I wonder: the call for deletion is 8 years ago. MGTOW is still there. I wonder if we should have another try. Krischik ^T 07:48, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@206.255....119 and @USER:Krischick, two points:

First, look here: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=MGTOW&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C33&as_sdtp= Here we see the term "MGTOW" being used for "Maximum Gross Take Off Weight" in many citable sources. We can use this information to improve this article with the reason for the letter "g". It stands for "gross".

Second, we can make another article, perhaps MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way), by using Google Scholar to find WP:RS sources that use the term for that referent. When there are only two referents for one term, we normally don't use disambiguation pages. Instead, we send the search to the primary referent and leave a navigation hatnote at the top of that page directing them to the secondary referent's article.

In order to do that, we must first collect citations. The most promising citable sources I found on Google Scholar were:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/a-war-on-women, which is Leader’s Suicide Brings Attention to Men’s Rights Movement by Arthur Goldwag, appearing in Issue Number 145 of the Spring 2012 of the Southern Poverty Law Center's periodical "Intelligence Report".
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-attraction-doctor/201204/why-are-men-frustrated-dating, which is an article calld Why Are Men Frustrated With Dating? Is dating a punishing situation for men? Published on April 2, 2012 by Jeremy Nicholson, M.S.W., Ph.D. in The Attraction Doctor column of Psychology Today.
http://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-465-01842-0, which is Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men Into Boys by Kay S. Hymowitz. There are other books, but they seem to be self-published, but this was published by Perseus Books Group, 2012.

Further research might show up more, but surely this is enough for a start-class or stub article. Chrisrus (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chrisrus (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way)

There is another referent of "MGTOW", an anagram pronounced "Mig-Tao" for the noun phrase "Men Going Their Own Way". There was one here but it had no citations. Let's do it again but right this time, starting with citations and summarizing them into the new article. Chrisrus (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where would we state an new article? It is not like in the early days where one could start an article and let it mature. If we just start now it will be delete in no time. --Krischik ^T 19:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How about User:Krischik/MGTOW_(Men_Going_their_Own_Way)? Or I could do a user subpage. Chrisrus (talk) 00:44, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User name space. Interesting idea. That way they have no right to delete it. Could work. Krischik ^T 20:15, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently found out about Men Going Their Own Way. I think it needs an article, I came here looking for it tbh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.250.76 (talk) 01:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can we have a conversation about improving this article? I have some thoughts, but I'd like to know someone's listening. Chrisrus (talk) 02:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is now redundant and should be deleted. I have created two new redirects to deal with the controversy visible above and also at Talk:Maximum takeoff weight. The two new redirects are:

Dolphin (t) 07:24, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that's not the best. The parenthetical of the first one is only loosely related. People will conflate Men's rights with Men Going Their Own Way. MGTOW is not a subset of men's rights. Chrisrus (talk) 05:16, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MGTOW

The usage and purpose of MGTOW is under discussion, see talk:MGTOW -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 06:21, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See also the discussion at Talk:Men Going Their Own Way -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:58, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At Requested Move 28 December 2015 there, it has been determined that "Men Going Their Own Way" is not the primary topic of 'mgtow' -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 00:33, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This has spilled over and affected this redirect as well -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:58, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]