tarquin wrote:
Cunctator has made a number of additions to the
"What Wikipedia is
not" policy page
To see the diff:
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not…
The one I quety is this, under the "not a genealogical or biographical
dictionary" heading:
A good measure of achievement is whether their lives (or deaths) were
newsworthy, that is, that there exist external sources on the people.
It seems to me that Cunc has added this so he can better justify the
keeping of the Sep11 casualties in Wikipedia.
any thoughts on this?
Perhaps the "(or deaths)" could be interpreted that way, but I would
give him the benefit of the doubt. Most of us who see no merit to
having 11 September biographies in Wikipedia see the creation of the
separate space for this as a reasonable compromise. I'm sure that if
Cunc or any others began abusing this policy statement in the way you
suggest you would have others to complain beside you.
Cunc's proposed change is a reasonable guideline that still requires
some measure of common sense. (Do we really need to define
"newsworthy"?) It does thwart those people who would sillily interpret
the policy as outlawing any kind of biography. It still leaves room for
royal genealogies where (particularly in mediaeval contexts) knowing the
relationships is parallel in importance to having a program to identify
the participants in a sporting event.
Eclecticology