On Friday 07 March 2008 01:50, Ian Woollard wrote:
On 06/03/2008, Philip Sandifer snowspinner@gmail.com wrote:
I will repeat my conviction that our notability guidelines are the biggest PR blunder we engage in.
Which is all the more frustrating given that the problem with most of these trivia sections seems to be an interface problem rather than a fundamental content problem. Because we've adopted too many artifacts of print like purely linear article design and spatial arrangement on a single page we're stuck with masses of data and side notes being a distraction to the articles. As a result we steadily delete valuable content that is not reproduced elsewhere and will not be reproduced elsewhere.
Go us?
An encyclopedia can't be about absolutely anything that anyone wants to add
Why not?
it would rapidly descend into farce.
No, it wouldn't.
It's not about space, it's about reputation,
Who cares about reputation? We're here to build an encyclopedia, not to make the rest of the world fall in love with us.
quality
I fail to see how having an article on my neighbor's cat will diminish the quality of an article on the city of Indianapolis. It's a red herring.
and scope.
Which should be "everything that exists."
If notability did not exist we would be forced to create it.
Why?