Talk:Flaite

Cuicos

An article on the term cuico (the polar opposite of a flaite)would be an interesting addition. --Soy Rebelde (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

It is unclear what "flaite" denotes

The way the beginning of this article is written, the impression is given the flaite is a generic derogatory term for a certain sort of character that can be found in urban districts in Chile, like "punks" or "slackers" or "gangbangers". This is why I lower-cased the name everywhere. But in this context, some of the generalizations made in the article seemed hard to believe, because they claimed that all these diverse, unrelated people had, for example, the same favorite football team.

Now I see in one of the articles that "flaite" is a nickname for a specific gang, called the Villeros. Is this true? If so, then

• This article should be moved to Villero.
• The article's introduction should explain that this is a gang, and that term is not some generic word for people in a certain social category.
• The article, when moved, should be edited so that "Villero" is the name used for these people. The existence of the derogatory term flaite and its derivation can be noted.

—Largo Plazo (talk) 18:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

No, your information is incorrect.

• Flaites is a term used to describe Chilean youth who participate in a lifestyle which determines their style, music, sports, etc.
• Flaites is not the name of a gang. If you read the article in it's entirety, including references, you will see that flaites come from any socioeconomic background.
• As for the term villero, I can say as a Chilean person that flaites and villero are not one in the same and thus not interchangeable. As a matter of a fact, you should note that villeros is a term used in Argentine, not in Chile.

As such, I disagree with your statement. --Soy Rebelde (talk) 19:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I got my impression from an article that you cited. "En el extremo opuesto están los Villeros, conocidos de manera despectiva como "flaites", que lucen de forma ostentosa holgadas prendas y calzado de marcas reconocidas y viven en las zonas más pobres de la ciudad. Los Villeros tienen un carácter "territorial" que los obliga a movilizarse por zonas de pertenencia y tienen preferencia por el equipo de futbol Colo Colo, uno de los de mayor popularidad en esta nación sudamericana." You used this to support the assertion you restored, after I deleted it, that flaites in general are fans of this particular team.

Now you are saying the "villero" is an Argentine term, despite the fact that (a) the article uses it to describe a Chilean gang, and says that's what they are called in Chile; (b) the article says that "flaites" is a term used for these Villeros, (c) you are using a remark that the article makes about these people who you now say are Argentinian to support the gross generalization about the preferred football team of flaites who are in Chile and who you say are not just members of this one group, the Villeros.

There seem to be a large number of contradictions among what this article says, what the cited article says, and what you wrote above. Would you mind providing some clarification? —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

There are no contradictions.

• You cited "despectiva como "flaites." Key word being como or "like." The article is making a comparative not a direct relationship.
• Speaking within the context of the Wiki article, which addresses the subject of vernacular, the term villero is an Argentinian slang.
• As for this specific reference, again, when in context, is meant to support the fact that flaites support Colo Colo.
• Although I see where you are getting confused, I don't agree with your assessment. The article is clearly about the slang term flaite. If it were about a gang, then I would expect the article to address items such as membership and affiliations, such as the article on Bloods does.
• Thus, renaming the article from flaites to villeros is not appropriate. I believe this was your initial concern. If you believe the one article can cause such a great confusion, then it should be updated. Perhaps you can help out with that?

--Soy Rebelde (talk) 20:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

If the article is about a term, well, a term doesn't have a favorite football team.

Regarding your understanding of the cited article: it appears to be lacking. En el extremo opuesto están los Villeros, conocidos de manera despectiva como "flaites" means "At the opposite extreme are the Villeros, known disparagingly as 'flaites'". It says that members of this group (Villeros) are known by this name. It's like saying "Edison Arantes do Nascimento is known as Pelé". There is no comparison here. (The word "comparative" wouldn't even apply: comparatives are words like "better" and "nicer"). Conocido como means "known as".

Furthermore, if "villeros" and "flaites" aren't being used in the cited article to refer to the same people, then the sentence "Los Villeros ... tienen preferencia por el equipo de futbol Colo Colo", a remark about the Villeros, would therefore not be a remark about the flaites, and would therefore not support any assertion made in this article about the flaites.

The article is about the term

Of course the article is about the term! Would you accept an article called white trash that says white trash live poorly and do often use drugs such as cocaine. Their favourite football team is LA lakers?. Because the article is about the term I propose to clean the article from all statements that does not deal with the term. If not this will became a festival for Chilean vandals that, thrust me, love to write about flaites. Dentren | ^Talk 23:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I would accept a description of the narrow characteristic set with which a disparaging term is primarily associated, but I would object to unjustified corollaries based on stereotypes, and I assuredly wouldn't tolerate the assertion that "The favorite basketball team of most white trash is the LA Lakers." The white trash of Texas, Georgia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Illinois all magically prefer the team that plays in Los Angeles? —Largo Plazo (talk) 00:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

To be fair and honor the essence of Wiki, I believe this article should be addressed in its entirety; negative stigmas an all. Otherwise it can be considered censorship. If anyone has trouble accepting a characteristic of the term or subculture that is the flaites, than that is something that should be addressed outside of Wiki. If statements can be validated, I vote they be kept. As for cleaning up the article and sensibility, when appropriate, an emphasis on key words such as stereotype, pejorative, and disparaging can be used to counter the negatives. That said, I think it would be prudent to rename Fashion to Elements of Stereotype; as with article Bogan. On a personal note, I am Chilean and am well aware of the social complexities within my country. I do not discriminate or participate in classism, or allow these to have any type of adverse affect on me whatsoever. Thus, I do not believe other people's discriminations should limit one from authoring well-rounded articles and I do not believe in framing an issue in one way or another. --Soy Rebelde (talk) 03:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

There is no censorship in wikipedia. Wikipedia in English is in inglish and if flaite is included here its cover the word itself, english and Spanish do have have more formal and less despective terms to refer to Chilean youths of low-socioeconomic background. Classifying flaites as a subculture is wrong and is only done so thrith order newspaper like La Cuarta (and thats not to convalidate). I invite you all to take a look at the spanish version of the article, which is by far much better. I hope you non Chilean users realizes this term is despective and as such it can not the formal title to an article about chilean criminals or "urban youth". Dentren | ^Talk 14:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it is understand that the term flaites is negative and that the flaites are infamous (I feel like I am beating a dead horse). However, what I am trying to convey is that some youths, irrespective of their socioeconomic background, are following the fashion sense of the flaites because it appeals to them. So please tell me, how would you explain it other than "subculture" (:is a group of people with a culture (whether distinct or hidden) which differentiates them from the larger culture to which they belong.). --Soy Rebelde (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

P.S. I really hate polemics. --Soy Rebelde (talk) 17:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's clarify again: despite what has been said, this article is not about a term, it's about the people to whom this term is applied. If it were about a term, it would be like the Gringo article, dealing with the history and use of the term, and wouldn't include all kinds of sociological information about the people to whom the term refers, comparable to the sort of information that isn't at Gringo but is, instead, at People of the United States). The article, as it's written, is about the people who are called "flaites".

Having said that, I agree with Soy Rebelde: I don't understand why it would be wrong to say that the flaites are a subculture. Dentren, it was made clear right at the beginning of the article that the name is derogatory/disparaging (we don't have the word "despective" in English). I assure you we don't have any word in English, whether formal or slang or derogatory, that applies specifically to this sector of the Chilean population. We do have slangy terms in the U.S. for American subcultures—"white trash", "gangstas", "punks", "goths", "Valley girls", etc.—for which we really don't have "formal" terms that properly identify these groups. I expect that the same is true in Chilean Spanish. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

how can you call [1][2][3]. I will challange the reliability of LUN, La Cuarta and Cronica.cl as unreliable sources for this topic. You are all welcome to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Chiton magnificus (talk) 17:54, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

A humorous approach

See http://inciclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Flaite. --Soy Rebelde (talk) 03:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Low class v. Low socioeconomic background

It is not appropriate to use the term "low-class" when authoring in English. It is considered vulgar and discriminatory. Please use low, middle or high-socioeconomic background when describing a social class. --Soy Rebelde (talk) 19:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

The origin of the term

The Spanish Wikipedia article on this has an alternative derivation for the word "flaite" and might have some other useful information or sources. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Ownership

It seems there is a lot of edit warring on this page. If the information can be substantiated it should not be deleted. If you find something that needs a citation, place after it and allow someone the chance to update it; within reason. If you believe it to be a serious violation, please address it on the talkpage or get an admin's input. Do not take it upon yourselves to continually revert other editor's validated contributions. It's borderline WP:3RR.

Although I hate to suggest we can't have dialogue on this issue, I see a tendency occurring here and would like to avoid any negative outcome. --Soy Rebelde (talk) 16:06, 25 February 2010 (UTC)