No, it definitely rises to the level of other stuff that gets Wikipedia pages. A lot of news coverage, genuine historical significance, etc.
On 6/25/07, Phil Sandifer Snowspinner@gmail.com wrote:
Personally, I'd delete [[Essjay controversy]] - we only think it's notable because it's a Wikipedia-related topic. Any other website and we wouldn't have it.
-Phil
On Jun 24, 2007, at 7:24 PM, Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
The big wars over linking to so-called "attack sites" have moved to yet another venue... and this time, instead of just chilling discussion on various and sundry talk and project pages (but being pretty much peripheral to anything to do with maintaining an encyclopedia, other than diverting energy away from it), they're actually having a direct and negative effect on our quality as an encyclopedia. It seems that, regarding the [[Essjay controversy]], one of the Wikipedia-related conflicts that is notable enough to have a mainspace article, a key part of the history of the unfolding of this story took place on one of the "attack sites". (Our favorite enemy Daniel Brandt played a big role in that.) So, naturally, some people wanting a well-referenced historical record wish to include the relevant link. Others are fighting it, making the same tired arguments about ArbCom rulings and pseudo-policy. I was trying to mellow out about this whole issue so that I could get back to doing something actually relevant to the encyclopedia, but it seems like the damn thing keeps intruding no matter what, like the monster in a bad horror movie. -- == 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/
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l