No, not for any of the stuff I'm getting into fights about lately,
like cliques and BADSITES. But for one of its article deletions.
You see, I was working on edits to one of my personal websites, in
this case one about e-mail formatting and related technical and
cultural issues (
http://mailformat.dan.info/ ). I decided, in the
course of talking about forwarded messages, to refer to the concept
of "glurge", which is the sort of sickeningly-sweet motivational
stuff (Norman Vincent Peale - ish) that gets regularly forwarded
around the net. Usually when I do something like that, I like to
stick in an external link to some place that describes what I'm
talking about, and lately Wikipedia is almost always my first choice
to try to find one. Unfortunately, it turns out that the Wikipedia
article on "glurge" has been deleted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Glurge
Thus, I had to go to Snopes instead to find a link to the concept.
Wikipedia is often at its best as a place to find balanced, useful
references about a variety of subcultural phenomena, Internet memes,
and the like. Why should we cut off our nose by deleting them?
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site:
http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips:
http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site:
http://domains.dan.info/