Talk:Dork

message: A dork is a kind,carefree,talented,friendly,weird,amazing,and downright awesome person who gives no thought to what anyone else thinks of them because they know they're awesome the way they want. Therealdork (talk) 04:20, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong!!

message: The article has 120 deleted edits as of today's date.  It has been deleted, recreated, deleted, and recreated.  Apparently, Texture tried to avoid the continual recreation and redeletion by making it into a redirect page.  That's not a bad idea, but others have objected and moved it to speedy delete.  I'm going to delete it again and hope that the vandals who have continually recreated it have moved on to greener pastures.  If this is not the case, if the page is recreated again, I suggest a protected deletion.  Geogre 14:51, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recreation/redeletion (please leave the talk page as a record)

message: The two words do not describe the same concept.  Please justify the redirect if you revert, or else you're just being uselessly obstinate. 71.131.184.183 10:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article should NOT redirect to nerd 

message: The website given as a sole reference is of dubious authority and does not provide source of its wisdom. mikka (t) 08:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Not verified" template

message: someone really didn't want this article to exist back in the day. I tried- check the deletion log y'all who can. maybe there wern't enough links to it to make it take off fast enough w/ other users. course, it's hard to tell right now how many backlinkz this would have if it weren't for that open-task inclusion. I need to seek my Kzzl Vision 08:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  finally! 

message: I just added an internal link to Adam Brodsky, a well-known anti-folk singer who is known by the name "Dork" or "Dorkboy". It's fairly clear if you look at his page. samwaltz 18:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Errr... I just bumped him into the inline text, as it looks like having a name listed in "See also" may be a magnet for vandalism. samwaltz 19:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Monikers

message: For reference, I just added "Dork" to the character archetype section of Situation Comedy, in case anyone wants to check up on Urkel, etc. samwaltz 08:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Situation Comedy]]

message: http://moojob.com/dork/ Cute video game. Is it worth mention? samwaltz 15:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had been thinking about adding a link to the game, but wasn't sure how ethical it would be since I'm the game's author.  Also worth a link, probably: Dork Tower, King Dork. Alan deLespinasse 20:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dork: The Game

message: :Image:Adambrodsky_dork.jpg
Grrr... I'm thinking the page could use some colour. This is the only thing I can think of; it is (clearly) one of Adam Brodsky's album covers. What do you think? Is a graphic desirable on this page? Can anyone think of a better one to use? samwaltz 09:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The page could use some colour

message: The stereotype described was obviously for 'nerd', look at the nerd page, the pictures there fit the description.ThePotsy 04:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed 'Stereotype' Description

message: :The term implies stupidity perhaps less regularly than it formerly did, and paradoxically can imply an unadmirable (bookish, academic) intelligence, much as "nerd" and "geek" do.
I really don't understand this sentence. What does "stupidity perhaps less regularly than it formerly did" mean? And why "paradoxically"?
::Maybe awkward wording (it was mine) -- glad if someone improves it. But I think there was a worthwhile point: the term once implied "stupid." Now it as at least as likely to mean "brainy," but not as a compliment. That's part of the history of the term. DavidOaks 20:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It may not yet have a wikipedia article (someone should feel free) but it's accessible online (couldn't get the particular day's cartoon to link properly), and the fact that an insult that once meant "penis" is used in a family comic strip is strong evidence that it is no longer recognized as having that reference. My view is, it serves a worthwhile encyclopedic purpose until a better example comes along. DavidOaks 20:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't get this 

message: The pretty much daily vandalism is a major energy-drain, preventing improvement of this article. I propose adding the following code (invisible in surface version and de-activated in edit view, borrowed from "Amish," in turn adapted from "GWB"):
{sprotected2}}
That is, protection and a comment -- Vandalism to this page will be reverted within minutes. Please consider helping instead of damaging other people's hard work. 
Thoughts? DavidOaks 04:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds great.IronChris  |  (talk) 04:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Dorks are so hot and are loved by many young girls in America —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.186.40.119 (talk) 23:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  dorks  

message: Why does this need to be an article rather than a simple dictionary entry?  Exploding Boy 22:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why?

message: I dispuate that 'Dork' is a Dutch surname. People might have signed thier names in the Ellis Island record that are different from their real names. Also into the 1910's there was a sophisticated Dutch civil registration system and I haven't found the name 'Dork' anywhere until now. I suspect people imigrated to the New World and simply picked a new fantasy family name 81.5.6.63 (talk) 19:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dutch surname? 

message: "Dork" is very seldom used in British English. The article fails to mention that it's basically a US-specific term, and thus does not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Thoughts?--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 11:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In Britain it gets used a lot, though maybe by English people deliberately using American English. Which raises interesting questions. almost-instinct 23:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, so it's just British people using American English, usually for "added effect", or for irony, or for sarcasm. It's not British English. The article should clearly state that it's an American English word. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 14:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This term is only really used in [North] American English 

message: As has been noted several times above, this page is a mere dictionary definition (something which Wikipedia is not).  It explains the meanings, possible origins and usage notes of a slang term.  Nothing here rises past what I would expect to read in a truly great unabridged dictionary.  The definitions and usage discussions belong over in Wiktionary where folks with the right skills, interests and lexical tools can more easily sort out the meanings and origins.
Options to fix the page here include:
# Expand the page with encyclopedic content - that is, content that goes well beyond the merely lexical.
# Redirect the page to a more general page on the appropriate sub-genre of slang.
# Replace the current contents with a soft-redirect to Wiktionary (usually done using the  template).
Pending a better answer, I'm implementing option 3 for now.  Rossami (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I tend to agree with you about this being a dictionary definition with a little useless trivia thrown in, I believe the proper course of action, if that's your concern, is to nominate the article for deletion, at which point a soft or hard redirect is a possible outcome.  If you disapprove of someone's creation of an article, it seems incorrect to simply blank out all of the content, as you seem to be doing, and certainly wrong to edit war over it.  An AfD process will allow consensus to emerge, and time for improving the article if it can be improved.  However, there was already a deletion discussion and a decision to keep, on this very issue, barely more than a month ago.  So you might just want to let it rest.   There have been some deletion nominations a couple years ago and more, as you know, but those may not longer be relevant. Wikidemo (talk) 19:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  AFD would quite properly reject the nomination.  AFD discussions may sometimes result in a recommendation to redirect a page but they are not the normal process for making that decision and even to the extent that the AFD participants reach such a conclusion, it is no more binding than any other normal-editor decision.  Deletion only applies to the complete removal of the page and the page history.  I do not think that a second deletion of the pagehistory is necessary or appropriate and could not in good conscience make such a nomination.  Whether or not the page should be a redirect is something that Wikipedia policy requires us to work out here on the article's talk page.  Rossami (talk) 19:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I for one would like option 1 due to the fact that it is my last name and am very curious to find the origin, thus far unable to.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.35.137.104 (talk) 21:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expand, merge or redirect  

message: #Recreation of deleted article without addressing the rationale of the votes for deletion is not allowed. 
#Wikipedia rules require valid references from reliable sources. Urban dictionary, blogs and webcomics are not valid references.
#Edit warring without discussiojn it talk page are inadmissible. 
`'Míkka>t 21:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Page protected

message: *As suggested in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=217692864 , I have made page Dork into a disambig page . I have semiprotected it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambig page

message: Dork is a term often bearing a derogatory connotation or stereotype, that refers to a person who passionately pursues intellectual activities, esoteric knowledge, or other obscure interests rather than engaging in more social or popular activities. Therefore, a Dork is often excluded from physical activity and considered a loner by peers, or will tend to associate with like-minded people.
 or 
slang for rude words  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.96.56 (talk) 14:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  dork 

message: Dork may also be used to describe a person who tend to do something socially inappropriate unintentionally.
Calpinkie (talk) 07:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: That's already covered by the first bullet point, "socially inept person".  Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 15:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

text: It's Columbia, and you misused the term refer to, so I doubt you have anything to contribute. Provide facts and printed books that use the word this way. No? Of course. There are none. 86.128.51.2 (talk) 20:31, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Calpinkie, 23 June 2011 

message: Citation needed tags were placed on the definition and the first dot point.  References aren't normally included in disambiguation pages per MOS:DAB, so I'll provide a reference here.  The Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary (Fourth Ed., 1998, Oxford University Press) gives the definition "stupid or ineffectual person" and the etymology "US dork penis". Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 10:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation request

message: Under "Other uses", add "Mana Dork" - a term used by Magic: The Gathering players referring to a creature (usually of lower power and mana cost) that can be tapped for mana. 71.12.216.47 (talk) 20:37, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested Addition