Talk:Whiggery

Cosmic? Arrow of time?

"Whiggishness, a more cosmic attitude on progress, liberalism, and the arrow of time in history." Is this a joke? The whiggishness article and this little disambig suggest a prank more than an article. Athænara ✉ 15:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should have been more clear about my criticism.

I don't mind a bit when I encounter fanciful terms in exploratory essays, but this is an encyclopedia. When I see "cosmic" in an encyclopedia article I expect quantitative statements about astrophysics and/or cosmology, not an a-scientific borrowing of a term because it, like, sounds so cool, you know? (Please pardon the nod to wackipedia, the valley girl wiki—unfortunately, that link is broken, and it looked so promising, too, with google showing "Whiggishness is like a generic term of like description for ...")

When I see the highly unlikely "more cosmic" I expect something which justifies the phrase—more cosmic than what? Surely not more cosmic than the cosmos itself? Similarly, when I see "the arrow of time" I expect specific well-constructed points, with perhaps even a nod to Stephen Jay Gould for having made good use of it as well, not vague maunderings and noddings to this, that, and the other.

I don't consult encyclopedia articles for brooding and musing but for statements which are clear, concise, and upon which I can rely. I don't want to see obscure dabblings in nearly random directions which never come to an encyclopedic point. The article to which half this little disambiguation page leads seems not an article but a sandbox gone prematurely public, viewed in utero in the namespace. –Æ. ✉ 01:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a joke. Please help improve the article. There are many ways to improve WP, but simply requiring duller wording doesn't rank high on my list. Charles Matthews 10:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I owe you more than one apology. Here's one; there's another nearby. — Athænara ✉ 15:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]