Well, Im the admin who removed the speedy, and it was a clear mis-tagging, but for what strikes the casual reader as esoteric subjects it helps to be very explicit and not assume they will even follow the links, let alone use google. And this is not really the place to complain about other editors.
On Feb 7, 2008 9:41 PM, The Mangoe the.mangoe@gmail.com wrote:
I can understand Jimbo's plaintive edit comment, because I've been beset by the rabid prod-ninjas. See, for instance, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Westar_Institute&action=histor... where my article, with four cites from two websites, was marked less than 3 minutes after I started it. OTOH, I see that his article is notability-tagged: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Church_of_Reality&diff=1827079...
There is a deficiency in the Wikipedia media model in that it rewards those who avoid tabular representation and expand each line into a separate article. The notion that verifiability, not to mention notability, is enough justify a separate article encourages this sort of padding-- and it is padding, because there's no extra information conveyed. I've been doing a lot of lighthouse articles, and really the only thing that saves them from meriting this sort of treatment is that each of them has a enough history to require a separate narrative for each.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l