Talk:Tone policing/Archive 1

Archive 1

Citation needed

I put a citation needed note on the final paragraph. It sounds like self-talk or polemics, and it is non-encyclopedic. 75.101.104.17 (talk) 18:52, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Sources

This article has only two cited sources and relatively biased content, out of tone with the rest of the wiki. 141.114.194.83 (talk) 04:05, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

The article needs to be re-written, it is biased (as previously said), and while not needing deletion it should be started again from scratch, but with a non-biased point of view attempting to not just explain why some people think the statements the term is attributed to are wrong. Uzantonomo (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I feel like the article relied too heavily on a specific usage of tone policing and does not talk about what tone policing is outside of the context provided. To fix the problem, we should rewrite the article to focus on tone policing, not only where it has been seen in one event, and use a more diverse set of resources. At the moment this article really does sound like soapboxing and the sources used do seem questionable at best. 72.253.19.238 (talk) 05:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree with the sentiments here. The Geek Feminism wiki on Tone Argument might provide possible sources, including Lorde, Audre (1981), "The uses of anger: Women responding to racism", The Black Past: Remembered and Reclaimed, retrieved 2017-06-26

I came here to find a dated source for the first usage of this term. The cited refs all date to 2016, but there is a non-inline link to an article from 2013. I went off-wiki and found a 2011 dated definition of "Tone Police" (as people, not as an argument) at Urban Dictionary: Tone Police "Tone police are people who focus on (and critique) how something is said, ignoring whether or not it is true." by jayaranathanman, October 04, 2011. This wikipedia article needs help, in many ways and on several levels. I wish i had time to research it and upgrade the article, but it is off my usual topic-track, so i tender my apologies for complaining without fixing it, and will look elsewhere for the data i want. 75.101.104.17 (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

This article appears to be overly biased to a certain type of limiting view, confusing all variations of privilege with simply 'white' & 'men'- & equating the underclass with non-white non-men- which is conflating those at the top of the power structure strictly with 'white men', which is, itself, a fallacy & an untruth. It is suggested that a rewrite is in order.

Nantucketnoon (talk) 19:41, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, this article is terrible. It needs to be rewritten from scratch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.120.186.90 (talk) 15:01, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Old proverb

I remember a proverb saying something like "The one who shouts is always wrong". It is something that people tell children in order to discourage them from forcing their will by temper tantrums. I understand the objective, but this proverb can as well be used for tone policing - if you prematurely assume that the one who freaks out first must be on the wrong end of an argumentation. In general, the one who resorts to shouting first demonstrates a lack of impulse control but is not necessarily wrong. This is true for children and for adults.

Does somebody know the proverb and where it came from? It could potentially be added to the article as an example. --2003:E7:7732:BF71:110:F5C:6C89:84FE (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Ideologic

This article is political ideologic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.217.170.75 (talk) 08:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Widening the scope

I think this article could benefit from covering tone arguments, as they've been discussed in rhetoric and philosophy, more broadly. The term "tone policing" is probably a social-justice coinage, but meta-arguments about the validity of arguing with people about their tone must be vastly older than the modern social-justice movement. I can see the Far Side comic now: one caveman says to the other "You no steal Thag's rock!" and the other replies "Thag being rude!" —Kodiologist (t) 14:50, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Weak sources

The claim that tone policing is often directed towards women relies on only one citation. This is a rather stark claim and should be backed by more citations for credibility. 81.229.10.227 (talk) 11:40, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Removing "criticism"

The section on criticism says "critics" claim the fallacy is autological, and yet can only find one random think piece article that talks about common usage and fundamentally lacks an understanding of the fallacy itself (and fallacies in general). The fallacy never says who can or cannot use what tone, nor does it ever say that using a certain tone in unacceptable, as this is in direct opposition to the whole concept of the fallacy itself. Heavily misinformed opinions do not count as criticism. 89.172.31.115 (talk) 08:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)