Talk:Kick the cat
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kick the cat article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on 25 November 2014. The result of the discussion was Nomination withdrawn. |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
is this article about the idiom or about abusing subordinates?
There's no clear topic to the article Bhny (talk) 23:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- They are one and the same. The idiom refers to abusing persons (or animals) with less power than oneself. Softlavender (talk) 00:49, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- No, I mean a use–mention distinction. Either the topic is "the idiom kick the cat" or the topic is "displaced aggression" Bhny (talk) 01:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- It's not a Wiktionary entry (it's a Wikipedia entry), if that answers your question; although at one point someone briefly tried to make a Wiktionary entry out of a stub article on the subject. Softlavender (talk) 02:16, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- It half reads like a Wiktionary article on an idiom and half like an encyclopedia article on "displaced aggression". You seem to keep missing my point. Bhny (talk) 04:48, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Article isnt perfect but essentially its about an idiom which has in recent times been considered to have academic value.--Penbat (talk) 08:31, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- It's about a psychological and cultural concept which has come to be described by a catchy idiom. Why is that a problem? I looked at the article "use-mention distinction" which you linked, and while I think I understand the distinction it makes (between talking about a thing and talking about the word for the thing) I don't see why a Wikipedia article can't do both. --MelanieN (talk) 15:58, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Article isnt perfect but essentially its about an idiom which has in recent times been considered to have academic value.--Penbat (talk) 08:31, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Categories:
- Start-Class psychology articles
- Low-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- Start-Class Health and fitness articles
- Unknown-importance Health and fitness articles
- WikiProject Health and fitness articles
- Unassessed Occupational Safety and Health articles
- Unknown-importance Occupational Safety and Health articles
- WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health articles