Talk:Newspeak/Comments
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Bias and inappropriate debate
After reading the Newspeak article a couple of times and beginign to edit it, I decided not to. There are so many edits that need to be made to bring this in line with what an unbiased article should be, that it would be more appropriate to delete huge sections it than to attempt to salvage those paragraphs.
In it's current incarnation, the article spends more time obfuscating what newspeak is with comparisons to other existing languages. This has almost no relevence to Newspeak. The point of Newspeak was that it it was a limited and corrupted version of English, and that a language with a smaller vocbulary makes it easier to use as a mind-control language. The incidental (or not) relationship to existing languages deserves nothing more than a side note. Not 4 paragraphs.
One of the intents of Newspeak is to obfuscate clear though and debate. This article, ironically, does exactly that. It spends the majority of the first 2 pages attacking Orwel's concept Newspeak for it's passing resmblance to existing languages, and comes as close as an article can to an outright attack on the very subjet it should be explaining.
The opening sections need a massive rewrite.

