Is there a technical reason why 'breakout' articles can't be article subpages? In that way they wouldn't be articles in themselves, but subsets of other articles, and you could judge the notability of an article in whole without judging its individual components separately. Maybe a worry that a proliferation of article subpages would make things unmanageable?
On Dec 21, 2007 4:44 PM, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 21, 2007 1:07 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
That sounds like an excellent argument for trashing the "notability" guideline, which has always been deeply problematic, particularly for its subjectivity.
Wholly agreed.
Additionally, most such articles exist as break-outs from an article that nobody is arguing should be deleted. Breaking out detail that would make the primary article unwieldy is a long accepted Wikipedia practise.
Remember that the Wikipedia jargon word "notability" originated as a back-formation from "non-notable," which was Votes For Deletion jargon for "I don't like it." And that's about all it still is.
Notability is the attempt to provide solid rules for deletion because of the criticism that 'non-notable' is subjective. However, consistent subjectivity is still subjective, no matter how consistent it is.
Notability is also not well derived from core policy, IMO.
-Matt
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l