Talk:SlutWalk/Archives/2013/December

Split up/Spinoff article?

With the effort to get a more worldwide view (thank you ‎Luxxxbella), the article is starting to get a bit long. Might it be wise to create spinoff articles for various sections like, for example, "SlutWalk in Europe" and "SlutWalk in North America"? EvergreenFir (talk) 19:16, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

That shouldn't be necessary. What's actually needed is some editorial trimming. I question the need for multi-paragraph sections on individual countries. Roccodrift (talk) 21:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi! First of all, EvergreenFir you're very welcome, I'm actually having a lot of fun doing this :)

I do think the article is getting kind of long, and since I'm learning as I go I never thought of a split up, but I do think it would be a good idea. I also was starting to think it would be necessary to add an introduction to the Latin America section, explaining a bit the interactions and common practices, subjects and even common chants and rhymes across the countries. I could go for a more complete summary, though, and pass all the information currently in that section onto a specific article for Latin America, and then do the same with the rest of the regions, one by one.

Roccodrift at first I thought Latin America would only need a few paragraphs all in all, but the truth is I found much more information than I expected. I took into account this is a grassroots movement in which every city (not country, city!) organizes independently, and therefore an accurate local description would be relevant to the effect of documenting the worldwide diversity of the movement, which is also one of the goals of WP:BIAS.

Plus, it's all information from verifiable sources on the subject that's being discussed, I'd guess we would need a strong reason to leave it out, right? (unless I'm overlooking some rule again, which is absolutely possible, haha). If it's a matter of space, I believe a split up would most probably solve that problem, and sections on individual countries would make more sense in a separate Latin American article. What do you think? Luxxxbella (talk) 12:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

It's not a matter of space. It's more a matter of using your editorial prerogative to decide what's important enough to include and what's not, so as to find a good balance between a readable, usable article on the one hand... or including every scrap of information you can possibly obtain, on the other hand. Seriously, it's just not necessary to assemble an exhaustive list of every coffee klatch and knitting circle that was held in the name of Slutwalk, everywhere across the entire globe. To be sure, a balanced global view is highly desirable. But at some point you're going to need to trim it down to just the highlights, and I'd say you're pretty much at (or very near) that point already.

Also, if good quality, global coverage is your goal (and it clearly is), then I strongly encourage you to resist the temptation to create spin-off articles. If you do that, the U.S.-centric bias will creep back in and the quality of the other articles will suffer. This sort of regional article proliferation ultimately detracts from the cohesiveness and usability of the encyclopedia. It's a bad practice. Roccodrift (talk) 13:26, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I get what you're saying and, believe me, I've left plenty of coffee klatches and knitting circles out of the text :D

However, I do think the local nature of the protests calls for a detailed view of each country, and we're talking of massive protests, ranging form hundreds to thousands of people in each city (there are exceptions below those numbers, but that's what they are: exceptions).

Regarding US-centrism, I think the only simmilar movement (worldwide grassrots protests spreading pretty fast across the globe through social networks) to this has been the Occupy Movement. I just checked that article and it seems to have achieved a good notion of worldwideness in the main article, and also allowed for more specific sub-articles (probably splitted from the main article?).

I also have the feeling that if spin-offs were that damaging, there wouldn't be a spin-off policy to begin with (but that's my feeling).

Also, are there any specific rules as to how long or detailed an article can/might/must be that would be relevant to this discussion? Luxxxbella (talk) 14:35, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Just FYI, I just finished adding all the information I had collected from Latin America. I'll move on to US and Canada (also called "Satellite" Slutwalks), and wanted to make sure if it's ok for you if I keep expanding the article while we discuss whether we'll split it, trim it or somewhere in between :) Luxxxbella (talk) 19:37, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

See WP:LENGTH for info. Roccodrift (talk) 21:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the shortcut :) I didn't find anything in WP:LENGTH regarding a required level of detail, and it actually points at WP:SPINOUT as the most desirable thing to do when an article gets too long. Furthermore, WP:RVREASONS gives no reason why the article should be trimmed, even supposing I was determined to record every single activity during the Slutwalks. The closest it gets is WP:IRRELEVANT, and the example given is a sentence about light bulbs in the article for tiger, which I honestly think is hardly simmilar to what I'm doing here. I am now convinced WP:SPINOUT is the way to go. Luxxxbella (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)