On May 5, 2006, at 7:17 AM, Phil Boswell wrote:
Again, replace
Star Trek with Pokemon (my favourite punching bag, for
no real reason). Would you really entrust Pokemon fans with deciding
which Pokemon articles are notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia?
Surely your proposal simply leads to vastly greater inclusion rates.
But if all of those articles were of good quality and well
referenced, who
could possibly object? Those articles are still subject to fearless
editing
from anybody who wants to fix the often egregious grammar and
spelling (as
is common elsewhere I should add :-). Also WP:NOT paper, remember?
It's not
as if those articles on Pokemon are taking up space which would
otherwise be
available for your own pet subject.
Undue weight. It's absurd for Pokemon to have 10,000 times more
coverage within Wikipedia as, for instance, 19th century philosophy.
--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch