Steve Bennett wrote:
That'd be cool. Let's think - what *is* the harm in boundless fancruft? There must be harm, or we would allow it. Perhaps it is simply that boundless fancruft strays too far from our mission, which is to produce an encyclopaedia that is not just a random collection of information.
Someone help me out here - we all know that it's wrong to have 600 pages describing every fight ever shown in any Pokémon episode. But why?
One hypothesis: Allowing too much "fancruft" in Wikipedia creates an imbalance in the community structure. There is a really large pool of 15 year old, computer savy kids (some may be older) who get easily attracted to writing wikipedia articles about f.e. star trek compared to a very small pool of for example experts on let's say homer. The latter group won't be as easily drawn into writing for wikipedia than the first. And they will be less and less willing to do so, if they find a community dominated by 15 year old star trek fans.
greetings, elian