On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
I would prefer we limit content to encyclopedic content. Obviously aggregating news, especially about individuals, is incompatible with that purpose.
Large amounts of Wikipedia articles on recent topics are nothing more than aggregating from news sources. There is a spectrum between that and summarising from secondary sources that have had time to assess, review, and come to a reasoned conclusion about a topic area. But too much is at the 'news' and 'current affairs' end of the spectrum. It *is* a problem, and it always has been.
I wonder, how much of the early editing (first 2-3 years), was on news topics? How much was on historical topics? ANd has that changed over time?
Carcharoth