John,
See [[Wikipedia:Vanity page]] and [[Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies]] - there are exceptions to the rule of verifiability and factuality in current policy.
To be clear, I am not advocating repealing these policies, simply for keeping factual, verifiable articles on places that are of interest to, and involve many thousands of people.
I can't help but feel that you are caricaturing my position.
Mark
--- John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
Sorry, I don't understand - why would vanity pages be eligible for deletion if the information therein was 100% verifiable and factual? Delirium said that this isn't a strawman because *we get 100% verifiable articles such as vanity pages which are deleted*. You argue in favour of their deletion, because they are vanity pages - what constitutes a vanity page? A page written by someone seeking glorification? But, why, the information's verifiable! Isn't Wikipedia supposed to be a compendium of human knowledge? I honestly don't understand your paradoxical - dare I say, hypocritical - stance on this.
John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])
Mark Richards wrote:
It's a straw man because you are taking the case in dispute (schools) and claiming that if we keep schools, we will have to keep an article on each school band member.
There are existing rules to deal with vanity
articles,
and to the extent that we have a problem with them, they have been deleted as vanity.
Let's not confuse the issues of schools with some hypothetical deluge of articles about cheerleaders
or
dead cats.
If I have presented my case as an extreme one, then
I
have misrepresented my aims. I certainly do not support an article on each high school band member.
I
doubt that you could really write a verifiable and factual article on them that was not a vanity page anyway.
It's not that these people are not notable, they certianly are to some people, it is the fact that these would be vanity articles, I am not proposing
to
remove this criteria for deletion.
Mark
--- Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
Mark Richards wrote:
Exactly - this is a straw man.
I don't see how it is a straw man at all. You
said
explicitly that there are no criteria besides verifiability that
are
acceptable. The entire contents of my local newspaper are verifiable, as they keep archives. Therefore, *anything* in my
encyclopedia
is a valid Wikipedia article, and if on a whim I decide to add anything from it, no matter how non-notable, you have no basis to delete it, because you reject notability as a criterion.
And there are many articles on Wikipedia like this that get deleted. There have been articles about college students
who
made Dean's List, which is verifiable from the University's website; articles about members of high school marching bands, which are verifiable from published lists of marching band members; etc. These all get deleted anyway, due to non-notability.
-Mark
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail