We have a lot of causes of harm to our public image, and as far
deletion and inclusion are concerned, there is really no way that we
can win public approval. Our notability debates reflect those in the
real world, and we will always be criticized for being elitist and
indiscriminate.
I do think that "Wikipedia is not a directory" is not being taken
seriously enough. Between all the football players, census data, and
other such directory data, we are creating an unmaintainable mess.
Wikipedia's model rewards people who create new articles, as you can
tell by reading AfD. Whether it will reward the considerable work
needed to keep all these articles up to date is at the very least
questionable. The angst over the fair-use-rationale image deletion
crusade suggests that it won't.
On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 2:28 AM, quiddity <blanketfort(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The longer I spend at Wikipedia (3 years now, not
bad), the more I
grow to favour Inclusionism, Mergism, and Incrementalism.
They seem to be the most optimistic and practical way to continue
dreaming big. (which is why I and everyone I know contributes. big
dreams)
Deletionists are the main cause of harm to both our "community/ies"
and our public image.