Talk:mikepost

Where can Mikeposting be found?
It can be found on many social media sites such as Reddit, TikTok, YouTube and Tumblr.

It is a relatively new trend. SaulGoodman07 (talk) 16:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Does verification always take this long?
Sorry to be a nuisance on this but I've been waiting about half a year for this to be verified

Can someone please explain what is going on. I removed the (rfv) mark but someone undid my hard work.

I have toiled day and night, and worked around the clock to ensure the finest quality content on this website

Thank you for your time and consideration

Love, Saul SaulGoodman07 (talk) 18:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @SaulGoodman07: If you want this to pass RfV, you should add at least three good quotations. You already added one, but it's not a particularly good one because it is more of a mention than a use. Also see the discusson at . 98.170.164.88 18:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the information

Lots of love, Saul SaulGoodman07 (talk) 21:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

RFV discussion: August 2022–February 2023
Chuck Entz (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Hard pass on KnowYourMeme being an acceptable source. - TheDaveRoss  16:55, 29 August 2022 (UTC)


 * It's a mention rather than a use, anyway, and uses different capitalization. - -sche (discuss) 17:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Not a criticism, but an observation: this entry has mostly (and extremely heavily) been edited by somebody whose user name is the name of a character from the series. Equinox ◑ 20:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Getting strong vibes that this is specific to a certain subreddit or similar. Theknightwho (talk) 14:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * FWIW, and you may already know this, adding post to things to mean 'make posts about' is a thing (I see web hits for Fryposting, owlposting, doctorposting...), so while people who mikepost may have made a subreddit, I don't think the word would be specific to one site per se; I see a few hits on Reddit, a Facebook group for Cursed Mikeposting, a few hits on Twitter; it just seems to be in general rare and low-value, broadly intelligible from the parts, particularly because we'd need to change the definition (or add a bunch of definitions) to note that it can refer to posting about any Mike, not just [//twitter.com/Speck_ham/status/1504616357387767810 Ehrmantraut] but [//twitter.com/dorr_rebel/status/1532735070485614592 Bloomberg] or [//twitter.com/BedazzIebub/status/1457989112535863297 Deltarune] or seemingly someone's OC. - -sche (discuss) 16:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, but the issue is more that could be referring to anyone. Plus it has to be a "thing" first, for people to understand what it means - especially given the definition we have. Theknightwho (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree it can refer to anyone. (Ditto e.g. doctorposting being variously a doctor making posts, or posting about Doctor Who.) So do we think only context clarifies when mikeposting is about Ehrmantraut like only context clarifies which Taylor a Taylor stan stans (and we wouldn't have an entry *Taylor stan) and so (if kept) it should be redefined to be general (~"post about a person or character named Mike"), or do we think any Mike for whom there are enough cites should get his own definition, or is it too rare to have at all? I'm unsure, we seem inconsistent in how we handle such things, e.g. Gregorian lumps together the popes but splits out a mathematician, Smithian lumps together most Smiths but splits out Adam, Achillean distinguishes the Iliadic one and Tatius, Jonesian distinguishes William and Mary, ... - -sche (discuss) 17:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

RFV Failed Ioaxxere (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)