They are all just pure nonsense and blasphemy. They are treating rocks like living human beings! There’s articles like “Tell What Breed Your Pet Rock is”, “Have a Pet Rock Funeral”, when rocks can’t obviously die, “Start a Pet Rock Orphanage”, and the list goes on and on. Opinions please.
Jordan
2
This isn’t a new debate…there’s been numerous threads on this topic in the past. I would agree with you on most respects, but I believe we came to the conclusion that unless the instructions can be followed legibly (like “How to Choose a Pet Rock”), you should mark it as NFD|imp (correct me if I’m wrong).
system
3
To me, as long as majority of the article leads to the fact that rocks are not treated as living things, articles can stay. It’s really easy to remove details or even a tip if they do in order to save a NFD.
blas·phe·my, n. pl. blas·phe·mies 1. a. A contemptuous or profane act, utterance, or writing concerning God or a sacred entity. b. The act of claiming for oneself the attributes and rights of God. 2. An irreverent or impious act, attitude, or utterance in regard to something considered inviolable or sacrosanct.
As long as the articles aren’t referring to rocks as living things, I guess it’s fine.
Swertyq
6
well people may want that but if ther gonna feed it or something i guess not
I think they should be deleted, but some people may find these articles helpful. Daisy
system
8
Well, the articles are relatively popular. I don’t think they should be deleted, but they shouldn’t treat rocks as living things either- that’s ridiculous.
system
9
The conclusion we’ve drawn as a community in the past is that if the article acknowledges the pet rock as a pretend toy, the same way articles about dolls and teddy bears do (e.g. How to Decorate Your Pet Rock) it’s fine. But if it treats the pet rock as a living thing (e.g. How to Feed Your Pet Rock) it’s inaccurate and should be deleted as such. That’s how I remember it…do others remember it the same way?
Zeal
11
I would agree with the original poster. Even if the article does what Krystle said. I mean, who even has a pet rock? It’s so stupid… Oh well. Some people will be some people.
I know a few people who have pet rocks, and none of them treat it as a living thing but simply as a sentimental object. As long as the article does not refer to the rock as a living thing it should be left alone.
My opinion…delete them. I think what the admins here are trying to say is (they will disagree but I dont care) they need the articles so they are keeping them. On the other hand people like pets and they pick a rock from the garden so its a free “pet” no food, litter, walks etc so it’s a free item that you can have fun with. BUT The way this started was by people pissing about and otehr people joined in, because this world is full of arogant gets that have no life. Nw we are trying to think, “Should we keep them”. What the hell? This site is for serious articles! There should be no thinking involved, its pathetic! My opinion…Delete them but they wont because the admins here are so full of their own power, they dont give a monkey’s what people think, they just please themselves… No you cant ban me for expressing my opinion…It’s not stated in the Terms and conditons or the writers guide
Have fun now…
Jordan
14
I’m not sure what you mean by “the admins need the articles so we are keeping them”. Anyone who can improve the Pet Rock articles to fit the conclusion we’ve drawn on them is welcome to do so, and if not, i.e. they cannot obviously be followed (something like How to Check if Your Pet Rock is Breathing, for example), will most likely be deleted.
I’d like to respectfully disagree with you on that. I don’t understand what you’re trying say or imply here. Being an admin is not a position that makes you better than any other contributor; it is an extra set of responsibilities that one is elected to take on, with the goal of maintaining a smoothly running environment in mind.
system
15
The definition of a wikiHow administrator is the complete opposite of everything you said. The entire mission of wikiHow is to create the biggest, yet, highest quality how to website. Yes, we do allow and accept people’s imaginations as far as pretending that an object such as a rock can be a “pet”, however, when things take a “turn” and the content makes the rock actually “real”, as far as having feelings, breathing and seeing abilities, then yes… then action can then be taken - whether it’s editing it out & saving the article as a whole or delete it if there’s no hope. Allowing rocks to become human-like may be the most well-known controversial “to keep or delete” topics, but it’s not the only “realistic vs. imaginary” subject on wikiHow.
I knew these comments would arise and Im not trying to be mean or angry…I wouldnt be on WikiHow if I go angry…I enjoy WikiHow…I am just stating my opinion and in reply I am going to say yes I know I described the opposite of what the admins job is and that is why I said that. Because some/most of the admins here seem to think taht they are better than non admins and then they think “The power is in my hands, I can eithe rkeep or delete these articles, people seem to want them deleted, let’s ignore them and keep them” Thats my view of the admins here. You may dislike me, I dont care, lots of people do but I am just saying that you are making a big deal over a small thing. Pet rocks are stupid ideas, therefore should be deleted. If I made a topic called “look after a pet carrot” It would quickly have {{NFD|jok}} on the top of it but in reality…it is the same
system
17
Any topic in this “field” is and/or has nothing to do with administratorship or how people view administrators upon “using powers”. This is purely and solely pertaining to reality vs. imagination. No administrator is making a big deal over anything. If something can not breathe in real life, then sorry, it’s not something wikiHow can keep.
Elyne
18
If you want to change anything on wikiHow you are welcome to propose anything but remember it will need community approval, and about the pet rock articles, personally i wouldn’t mind if they would end up deleted , but I just can’t go and do that because that would go against the rules that the entire wikiHow community made up in , and currently that is to keep the pet rock articles.
Just because you are an admin does NOT mean that you are right about this. I am entitled to my beliefs and I am entitled to argue them. And I WILL argue them. You are too and rightly so…you never answered about the “pet carrot” article that WOULD get deleted if it was created…thats somethink that WikiHow can keep…
