In a message dated 4/23/2009 3:09:18 AM Pacific Daylight Time, oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com writes:
Why shouldn't it be in the article? Wikipedia is not paper, if we can have an article on every Simpsons episode, why not include this information?>>> -------------------
Undue... Weight. No biographer past their Intro Class would write something like this.
Whether a list of every town Bill Clinton visited exists, does not mean we should host it in his biography.
In this case, there are two pages (yes just two) of "biography" if you will, and *six* pages of this nonsense. That's just a tad overweight I think we can all agree on that point.
Will Johnson
**************Big savings on Dell XPS Laptops and Desktops! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1219799634x1201361008/aol?redir=http... eclick.net%2Fclk%3B214133440%3B36002254%3Bj)
2009/4/23 WJhonson@aol.com:
In this case, there are two pages (yes just two) of "biography" if you will, and *six* pages of this nonsense. That's just a tad overweight I think we can all agree on that point.
The solution is to add more bio, not to cut the land holdings.
- d.
2009/4/23 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com
2009/4/23 WJhonson@aol.com:
In this case, there are two pages (yes just two) of "biography" if you will, and *six* pages of this nonsense. That's just a tad overweight I
think
we can all agree on that point.
The solution is to add more bio, not to cut the land holdings.
More bio would obviously be fine, but I don't agree that that there is a problem to be solved here.
If it bothers you there is too much "of this nonsense", don't read it. That "nonsense" to you may be much more important to someone else.
"Undue weight" is not an issue either. The article is not asserting that the "nonsense" is more important than anything else in the man's life. It is what it is: a reference list.
Michel
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:19 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2009/4/23 WJhonson@aol.com:
In this case, there are two pages (yes just two) of "biography" if you will, and *six* pages of this nonsense. That's just a tad overweight I think we can all agree on that point.
The solution is to add more bio, not to cut the land holdings.
There might not *be* any more bio. Sometimes you can only have stub biographies, which torpedoes Will's argument to do a biography by the numbers, with carefully weighted sections. Personally, a stub bio and a link to a list of his holdings would have been sufficient for me, but the way it has been done is OK as well.
Carcharoth
Absolutely.
--Falcorian
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 3:19 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The solution is to add more bio, not to cut the land holdings.
- d.
Let's come back in a year and see how much more the bio bits have been expanded by.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Falcorian alex.public.account+ENWikiMailingList@gmail.com wrote:
Absolutely.
--Falcorian
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 3:19 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The solution is to add more bio, not to cut the land holdings.
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l