Talk:Validly published name
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unintentional "doublespeak"
[edit]It's tricky to write this article properly because the ICN arrogantly (and falsely) claims to control the definition of an ordinary word. "Name" really does just mean what everyone already knows it to mean, and cannot mean whatever the ICN would like. Claiming that the name of something is "not a name" is foolish, and claiming to have created a new, proprietary sense of the word "name" is ridiculous because people can't be expected to know which sense is intended.
The ICN's goals would be better served by coining an entirely new word (i.e. something no one could ever have heard of) and using that, instead of falsely claiming to have hijacked an ordinary word. Deliberate misuse of a simple word entirely unrelated to the topic could also work; "candy", for example, or "boot" – because the meanings don't interfere with each other. TooManyFingers (talk) 19:17, 11 June 2025 (UTC)