Talk:Russian Roulette (Drinking Game)

From Wikiversity
Jump to: navigation, search


Is this an appropriate topic for a Wikiversity how-to page? --AFriedman (talk) 20:44, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

If there is consensus it is inappropriate, I will delete. But I'd like to hear some other people's thoughts first. --AFriedman (talk) 20:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I've removed the last sentence which is probably the most controversial - otherwise I find the information to be clear and well-balanced. However, the pages needs improving - e.g., what's the connection with learning? It also needs categorising. I wouldn't like to see this speedy deleted - rather it should go to WV:RfD for discussion. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:41, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I've placed a few categories on this page. I agree that there should be a discussion before we say "delete." The obvious category for this, in my opinion, is a section of WV about social activities. Does this section exist? Even here, however, it is possibly a problem because I don't think WV should encourage hazing. Drinking games are arguably a form of hazing. I'm putting it on RfD. --AFriedman (talk) 03:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Educational opportunities[edit]

The fact is, many people engage in these sorts of activities, many in ignorance of its possible dangers and impacts on health. I think we have an opportunity here to help minimise harm and even discourage such activities in groups where it is clearly inappropriate (children), and for us to offer information on risks and considerations, variations of the game that minimise risk of harm, and alternative activities people can consider. We should do so in a non moralistic way, remaining as objective as possible. This in fact opens a whole area of possibility for Wikiversity and its educational role in harm minimisation with regard to many activities. Leighblackall 06:46, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Leigh, thanks for pointing this out, and thanks to everyone who helped salvage this page. I like how the discussion was closed and at this point, would support "keep." --AFriedman (talk) 17:26, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Still not educational[edit]

An actual attempt to minimize risk of harm, or to help students learn to avoid dangerous activities, would be excellent. This is none of those, and in particular the "how-to" part of the page is not helpful or educational in that regard. The lightly useful/educational parts of the page, asking very general questions for contemplation, would be fine on their own or as part of a more general "Drinking games" resource.

Unsourced, possible neologism[edit]

The lack of any links to sources describing the drinking game in question (the game described here is not even one of the primary variants of drinking games called 'Russian Roulette') points to a need for better style/review guidelines for Wikiversity material. If editors here want it to be within scope to create a new drinking game and list it as 'context' for an educational project, they should make a point of explaining and defending that guideline very, very well. That goes well beyond the idea of OR for meaningful research and analysis. SJ+ 07:33, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

While this page is not my project, I think some points need thinking about SJ. One is the idea of thinking about this page as a finished resource (or aiming for it) as apposed to an open ended process. I realise there are policies that some Wikiversity editors bring to bare, and that too is part of the process I'm about to describe (just not a process I would personally bring into a project.
If we think of it as a process, then the important thing to preserve here is the process of learning, rather than regulating it or discussing deletion. The originator of this page (or others coming to it in a similar head space) is now compelled to think about many things beyond what they were thinking when they first put this page together, as would the new person who happens across this page and adopts it for further development. Even if the game doesn't exist elsewhere, its invention here is still relevant to the process, and leads people to learning.
Wikiversity is the place for such things, because this is the space where people take learning seriously, no matter what the challenge (in my eyes anyway). They can turn an at-first silly project or disruption into a learning opportunity for everyone, so long as they don't delete it or lose the trail of documentation of that process.
But its not my project, and I realise some of my comments don't reflect the consensus of the Wikiversity governance policies. Leighblackall 03:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)