Talk:1485: Friendship

In the article Randall wants to make us believe friendship is a rather new phenomenon or trend and its "early" occurences are something special,which may be true for bromance - at least for the term - but not for the concept. Sebastian --108.162.231.68 07:44, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not currently up to doing it, but I feel we need further details of, and definitely citations for, the articles that have been vandalised. Maybe we could even have graphs showing view, edit, and vandalism spikes. Davii 141.101.98.154 11:18, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised that this lead to Wiki-vandalism? 108.162.216.109 12:25, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The explanation currently seems to suggest that this is the page for "Bromance", trying to bring it into line with "Friendship". But with the "Friendship page" being the target of the comic, "How to improve the Bromance page" titletext and the "Portmanteau of 'Friend' and 'Ship' (i.e. romantic linking)" bits, I read the comic as "If Bromance is being used for non-homosexual same-sex associations, then Friendship 'obviously' now means for homosexual same-sex (indeed, it appears male/male only!) relationships. This is similar to complaints (which I personally have sympathy for) about the word "Guesstimate" being an unnecessary neologistic portmanteau in common use, as someone using it often actually means "Estimate" in its normal state of the term and thus must imagine "Estimate" is something far more strict. (Or else they invoke th term when they actually mean "Guess" in the first place, either to make it sound 'better than a guess' or with the same 'shove-over' attitude applied to that word, e.g. guess is "only ever out of thin air" rather than often-as-not based upon a semi-educated hunch if not more.) So, anway, as it it currently stands, I don't agree with the way the explanation goes. But I can't actually say it's wrong either! We now return you to your regularly-scheduled programme. 141.101.99.112 14:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)