Message: 5 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:44:20 -0400 From: Phil Sandifer Snowspinner@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] WP:LIVING and "sensitivity" again To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Message-ID: AE950BBF-4D5A-4038-9A37-3B6734D40931@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
On Aug 29, 2006, at 6:37 PM, geni wrote:
On 8/29/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. Bluntly, most of our articles about pop cultural figures need an enema.
Evedences?
Have you ever READ a popular culture article?
Particularly one about a fictional character, where you've got better- than-even chances of being right to add {{cleanup fiction-as-fact}} to it before you even start to deal with its other problems, of which there will be many.
And have you ever considerd trying to fix that and improve the articles instead of complaining about it on some mailing list? It's amazing how often the people who have virtually no experience actually editing articles and creating content are the ones who complain the most.
~~ Sean
On 30/08/06, Sean Black hulksmashly@gmail.com wrote:
From: Phil Sandifer Snowspinner@gmail.com
Have you ever READ a popular culture article? Particularly one about a fictional character, where you've got better- than-even chances of being right to add {{cleanup fiction-as-fact}} to it before you even start to deal with its other problems, of which there will be many.
And have you ever considerd trying to fix that and improve the articles instead of complaining about it on some mailing list? It's amazing how often the people who have virtually no experience actually editing articles and creating content are the ones who complain the most.
Which last assumption applies to neither Phil nor myself, as you should know.
Articles on pop singers and so forth tend to hagiography because the fans are the only ones interested and keep the criticism out. Pick and read some.
Telling people who say "there's a problem here" to shut up and fix it and not bother you seems like denial rather than something that assumes systematic problems are worth considering at all, let alone solvable.
- d.