On 27/06/2010, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
On 27 June 2010 17:47, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Where you draw the line, though, is quite tricky...
So should the various articles linked to from here be deleted?
Economics was a bad example, perhaps :-)
That said, this illustrates the point - we are quite capable of having an article on [[neoclassical economics]] and one on [[marxist economics]], but what we don't have is two co-equal articles on [[economics]], one from a Marxist perspective and one from a neoclassical perspective.
They're subarticles. The Wikipedia allows subarticles, and that's not considered a fork. And even that can be abused.
As I say, fuzzy line, especially with more philosophical concepts - it shows up the problems with simply saying "we don't like forks".
We don't like forks. That isn't the problem. The problem is the people that DO like forks.
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk