On 08/04/2011 11:09, WereSpielChequers wrote:
<snip>
Other options would be for a site that ended the inclusionism/deletionism conflict by abandoning notability and concentrating on verifiability or aiming for comprehensiveness. That seems to work for IMDB but possibly you need to restrict this to specialist pedias - aiming for coverage of all films and their cast is one thing, but on a general pedia you need to set a threshold somewhere unless you are prepared to have articles for pet guinea pigs.
Hmmm yes. It is interesting to me that Google Knol is nowhere on your list of viable competitors (you did make some good points in favour of those you mentioned).
"Notability" has always been a broken and widely-misunderstood aspect of enWP. My impression is that deWP, for example, sets the bar higher, and has fewer "problems": in a word, deletionism can work well enough. Comprehensiveness is of course about total content, while notability is about topics you recognise. "Salience" is the neglected concept, which is relative to topic.
To get back to knols: this sort of "factual blogging" isn't really likely to produce much interesting content, absent incentives. And no serious "publishing process" is likely to produce anything that is way better, unless it is quite complicated. I feel that's the correct conclusion from (en)WP. There may be an improved model, but please don't tell me that a few tweaks will eliminate the complexities entirely. There are choices that can be made about where to place the tricky parts.
Charles