What's the best procedure to follow when encountering an article like [[Bugaboo Spire]]? It doesn't seem to be copied copyrighted material, but more likely original research, and at the very least a how-to guide[1] for climbing certain mountains. Simply chopping the material in question out seems a little brutal.
[1] cf. [[WP:NOT]]
I didn't read the article, but how-to guides belong at wikibooks.
On 10/29/06, Earle Martin wikipedia@downlode.org wrote:
What's the best procedure to follow when encountering an article like [[Bugaboo Spire]]? It doesn't seem to be copied copyrighted material, but more likely original research, and at the very least a how-to guide[1] for climbing certain mountains. Simply chopping the material in question out seems a little brutal.
[1] cf. [[WP:NOT]]
Earle Martin http://downlode.org/ http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/ _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Earle Martin wrote:
What's the best procedure to follow when encountering an article like [[Bugaboo Spire]]? It doesn't seem to be copied copyrighted material, but more likely original research, and at the very least a how-to guide[1] for climbing certain mountains. Simply chopping the material in question out seems a little brutal.
All but the most obscure or recent climbs have an authoritative climbing guidebook that is the right source for details of route descriptions - you won't find original research on WP unless first-ascenders start reporting their adventures here rather than in the climbing journals. The prescriptive rather than descriptive style is typical for routes, descriptive style tends to be clumsy. Given that WP is a compendium and not the whole library, I think the right approach is to prune each route down to general description and highlights, and refer readers to the climbing guidebook for full details - climbers printing out WP articles to take along seems just as undesirable as surgeons printing out articles on their way into the OR... :-)
Stan
Stan Shebs wrote:
Given that WP is a compendium and not the whole library, I think the right approach is to prune each route down to general description and highlights, and refer readers to the climbing guidebook for full details - climbers printing out WP articles to take along seems just as undesirable as surgeons printing out articles on their way into the OR... :-)
Why not? If you get lost during your trek they can be very helpful for starting a campfire.
Ec