On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 21:09:20 -0700, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
I know at least one major problem: the lack of objective external coverage.
In Wikipedia or elsewhere?
Elsewhere - after all [[WP:NOR]].
You can't trust the fan sites. And there's so much being produced that it's difficult for even a site that limits itself to one genre to keep up. We have chosen to comprehensively attempt a documentation of all genres to the point where many would see us as leading the pack in such things.
Hmmm. Not what we're supposed to be for, though, is it? Leading the pack in documenting things? I thought we were supposed to collect information from reliable secondary sources? Without novel syntheses?
Other, more "serious" subjects are still doing respectably well, but our greatest success is in what many people see as trivial. We still demand NPOV on these articles, but can be more relaxed about original research.
But we shouldn't be. Unless we want to change our mission to being the *first* secondary source to document things neutrally from *primary* sources?
The good secondary material is just not there, and you don't maintain a lead by waiting for other sites or books to put something decent together.
Who needs to maintain a lead in doing what is, after all, primarily a job of documenting a heavily commercialised fad largely aimed at extracting money from gullible kids?
Guy (JzG)