Michael Snow wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 5/6/06, A jokestress@gmail.com wrote:
- Are "criticism" sections valid in general, or do they just become a
repository for quibbles and an amplifier of relatively insignificant hatecruft about a person?
They are not only valid, in many cases they are necessary.
I beg to differ. In many cases they are not at all necessary. In fact, they are often symptoms of the shoddy research, writing, and organization that has gone into so many of our most problematic biographies.
I think you are both right. In many cases they are necessary, and in many cases they are not necessary. :)
And I agree with the view expressed by others that often, they are a symptom of bad writing. That is, it isn't that we should not include the criticisms, but that the information should be properly incorporated throughout the article rather than having a troll magnet section of random criticisms.
The guidelines are perhaps adequate, because this is partly a cultural issue. But it's been clear for a while that we have serious systemic and cultural issues on articles dealing with living people.
Indeed.