[WikiEN-l] Daniel Brandt

[Andrew Gray]

On 23/02/07, Jeff Raymond <jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:
> Mark Ryan wrote:
>
> > Consensus there appears to be to endorse the deletion.
> >
> > I thought it would be important to mention this on the mailing list,
> > considering the number of people who have participated in debates over
> > the existence of the Daniel Brandt article over the years.
>
> Every time I think I can't get more disgusted, something else happens.
> It's bad enough we can get the right mix of editors to bully the rest of
> us around, now we're going to cave to Brandt?

And here we have the entire problem with this article (and a few others).

The community as a whole is very twitchy about some issues. Someone
wants us to remove a page on them, we say "fuck you, we're not
censoring ourselves, we're going to make the page *better*". And we
get so caught up in doing this that the quiet voice of common sense -
do we really need to have this article? is it worth the effort? is the
subject of encyclopedic notability? what does editorial judgement say?
gets lost in the noise.

"Caving to Brandt" may have the same functional effect as "applying
common sense", but that doesn't make doing the latter the same as the
former.

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk