Talk:Rape rape vs. "rape" rape

This is an personal experience/editorial entry based on personal opinion and does not belong in Category Encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles are factual articles written with the goal of preserving knowledge and elucidating ideas pertaining to boylove. --Etenne 14:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Uh, I'm kind of confused now...

For example, if somebody is interested in finding out the strange things about the laws regarding BoyLove, they are likely to go to the Law category, aren't they?

Is the article about the strange things about how the law applies to BoyLovers? Yes, absolutely. So...[[Category:Law]]

For example, if somebody is interested in finding out about the strange ways that psychologists view BoyLove, they are likely to go to the Psychology category, aren't they?

Is the article about the strange ways that psychologists view BoyLove? Yes, absolutely. So...[[Category:Psychology]]

For example, if somebody is interested in curious things about how BoyLove sexuality is viewed by society, they are likely to go to the Sexuality category, aren't they?

Is the article about BoyLove sexuality? Yes, absolutely. So...[[Category:Sexuality]]

For example, if somebody is interested in reading about the personal experiences of BoyLovers, they are likely to go to the Personal experiences category, aren't they?

Is the article about the personal experiences of one particular BoyLover? Yes, absolutely. So...[[Category:Personal experiences]]

But stop a moment, and ask yourself this: If someone is interested in strange things about the laws regarding BoyLove, or about how psychologists view BoyLovers, or about how BoyLover sexuality is viewed by society, they are not likely to go to the Personal experiences category to find those things, are they? Tell the truth--is that category that you would go to, to find those things?

See, there is not just one correct category for each article. There can be many correct categories for each article. The inclusion of categories is so that the interests of the reader are accommodated. It is not about "putting things in the one right category". Don't you see what I am saying? Haven't you looked at how other wikis categorize articles? User4 (talk) 18:40, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Hopefully what I just spent several hours putting together will be of some help Help:Encyclopedia and answer some of your questions. I will go back and try to address your issues point by point later. I am sort of burnt out right now.--Etenne 18:53, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Is this article "factual"? Yes. It contains a large number of facts, all of which can be confirmed through researching the topics.

Is this article written in a stilted, "academic" style, with lots of big words, and long and twisty sentences? No. It is written in a conversational style, a style that makes it very easy for the average person with a high-school diploma to read and understand it.

Too often academics try to "impress" their readers with the large vocabularies they have and their skills at creating long, grammatically correct (though often run-on) sentences. OK--if that's what they want to do, that's just fine. But then only other well-educated academics will be able to read and understand what they write!

Is BoyWiki about communicating important facts in a way that the the ordinary person can understand them, or about impressing the academic elite?

If someone thinks that articles on BoyWiki are going to "impress the academic elite" they are sorely mistaken. Much better articles already exist in academic journals which address the issues surrounding BoyLovers. Unfortunately, most are written to impress others belonging to the "academic elite" and so the ordinary person can't understand what they say.

Could this article be rewritten in a more academic style? Sure it could. But the more "academic" that it becomes, the less "accessible" it becomes. Is that what BoyWiki really wants? Articles that ordinary people cannot understand? User4 (talk) 22:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)