On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 21:52:47 +1100 English Wikipedia wrote: On 2/19/07, George Chriss <GChriss(a)psu.edu> wrote: non-encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide, a doctor, a pharmacist, a drug I find it frustrating how often useful information is removed under the single principle of "Wikipedia is not a ...". Explaining how to use a coffee plunger? "Wikipedia is not a how-to..." - yes, but what surely an explanation is an essential part of the article. Links to articles that demonstrate the concept of [[One deal a day]]? "Wikipedia is not a repository of links". Mentioning the local tourist attractions and best restaurants of a small town? "Wikipedia is not a travel guide" - yes, but that's probably the most useful thing you could write about a small town. Is it time we replaced WP:NOT with "Wikipedia is not an encyclopaedia. It's unique, and it's just trying to be useful to people, dammit." Steve Hi, Wikibooks or Wikitravel would be good homes for the items mentioned above. Part of Wikipedia's appeal, at least to me, is that good authors are very picky about choosing relevant information that best illustrates an abstract subject. To borrow the example: I know that a pancake comes from a Bisquick box, but what if I want to know what a pancake **really** is? -George en: [[User:GChriss]] _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l