Talk:Meta (prefix)

message: It seems to me that there is a new usage of "meta" as its own word that is becoming quite common. "Meta" describes a joke or a concept in a popular art that steps outside the narrative and addresses the audience on a different level or from a different frame. The simplest example is when a character breaks the fourth wall. Or if a dialogue between two characters makes sense to the audience because of knowledge the audience has from outside the story, but would be nonsensical to the characters inside the narrative, it can be referred to as being "meta." 
These are sort of off-the-cuff definitions and examples. I'm sure there has been higher-level thought put into this by smarter people than me. But I think that this usage deserves coverage in wikipedia, because I hear it more and more frequently.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B85B:35F0:21C:B3FF:FEC3:2572 (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  New contemporary usage 

message: "change", was placed in the greek definition. it may be a contemporary usage of meta. But not so in the original greek.
--Steamerandy (talk) 19:46, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed "CHANGE" from greek meaining of the word. 

message: We need to cover use of meta as a stand-alone word.  This appears to have originated in the early hacker community (hacker in the sense of 'consummate and adaptive programmer', not 'system cracker') in the late 1960s and 1970s, probably also involving the university mathematics and philosophy crowds, since there was significant overlap.  This is documented to a limited extent in The New Hacker's Dictionary (a.k.a. The Jargon File in its online form).  It doesn't necessarily establish earliest usage in this manner, which might come from philosophy journals or something.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:34, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use as a stand-alone word 

message: I'm not sure  what the Sierpinski triangle has to do with Meta. The caption only says that it is an example of Meta, but doesn't elaborate. I'm removing this image, hope this doesn't offend anyone...Amitushtush (talk) 10:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Image 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. And the dab page will be moved to base name. The discussion here largely focused on whether or not the prefix is the primary topic, and I find consensus that it is not. While convincing arguments were made that the prefix could be the primary topic in terms of long-term significance, we also have to consider the usage of a term in determining a primary topic. WP:PT1 as written says  (emphasis my own). There does not appear to be a usage more common than all the others combined and thus this appears to be a WP:NOPRIMARY situation. (closed by non-admin page mover) estar8806 (talk) ★ 00:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Meta →  – The readership interest in Meta Platforms dramatically exceeds that of this prefix, and the company operates as "Meta" (since 2021). If there is a WP:primary topic for "Meta", it is not the prefix. If someone has a suggestion for an alternative disambiguation term (considering the recent practice of using "meta" as a stand-alone word, as in "That's really meta"), that seems worth considering; however, the article does not currently discuss that usage (at least not in the lead section). I don't have an opinion about whether  should be moved to  or if  should become a "primary redirect" to  or if  should be moved to . —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 10:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This comment does not express an opinion about the request in the RM itself, i.e. whether or not to rename the article about the prefix. Do you have an opinion about that? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ideally, all relevant pages would be named Meta, but of course that's impossible.  Renaming this article (about the prefix) is a necessary evil if we move something else to Meta or make Meta redirect somewhere else.  There's no merit to moving this article per se, but it may be justified to free its title for the dab. Certes (talk) 09:43, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Changing to support following a reminder below that pageviews are 30:1 in favour of the company.  We serve readers better by offering them what they want rather than what we think would be good for them.  However, moving the company to the base name would still be a step too far.  Certes (talk) 19:57, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

text: There is certainly a RECENTISM effect, but the ratio of readership interest is huge, so the vast majority readers are clearly being led to a different topic rather than the one they are seeking information about, and this has been true for years. Maybe Meta Platforms shouldn't be considered primary, but definitely the prefix shouldn't be. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:55, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 November 2023