On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:57 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2009/9/24 Carcharoth
<carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com>om>:
He said sections, not articles. WP:UNDUE applies
within articles.
Whether a version of WP:UNDUE should apply across the whole
encyclopedia is essentially the question of notability repackaged. And
when you spin sections out of existing articles to form new articles,
then WP:UNDUE clashes with WP:NOTABILITY (expand a section - you may
be unbalancing the article; spin off section to form a new article -
you may be unbalancing the encyclopedia).
That's a view of the project that comes from an immature understanding
of it. Unbalancing an article is all visible on the same page;
however, three million Simpsons articles is *invisible* to the readers
of articles on particle physics unless they specifically go looking
for them. It actually doesn't affect them at all.
Yeah. I know that. Some people at AfD don't know that.
Back in the early days of the odious origins of the
jargon word
"notability", back when it was a buzzword on VFD meaning "I haven't
heard of it," people would raise this as one of the spurious arguments
that made no sense on a moment's reflection. Like the one that too
much text would overload the servers, so the okemon articls had to go.
Please don't say this stuff without at least a moment's thought on
whether it actually makes any sense.
I do try. Hint: this was about summary style spin-off articles, and
where the line is drawn there. Not about notability in general.
Replace references to notability above with WP:SUMMARY, and it might
calm you down.
Carcharoth