At 05:07 06/11/2003 -0800, Jimbo wrote:
"Cory Hall" -- this one did get redirected to U. Cal Berkeley, which is absurd in my opinion. This is a well-known building, it may certainly have an article, even if the topic would not make it into 1.0. When was it built? What function does it serve? Who was the architect? What famous things happened there? All legitimate stuff.
Absolutely. But perhaps when you consider that the content of that page was nothing more than "Cory Hall is the Electrical Engineering building at the University of California, Berkeley. It is across the street from Soda Hall", and that the same content has been merged into the U Cal, Berk page, the redirect doesn't seem so "absurd" any more.
Given that some mention of Cory Hall is needed in the UofC,B page whether the Hall has its own article or not, the question is: is it better to have this info in the UofC,B page and duplicate it on its own page, or is it better to just have the info in one place and only make a separate [[Cory Hall]] page when there's more info about it? Not an easy question to answer, I think - the first could result in duplicated effort across the two articles, while the second could discourage expansion of the info about Cory Hall completely. But both seem reasonable positions, neither is absurd.
Anyway, how we handle stub articles like these is a separate issue to deletions. Nobody's suggesting that we delete this sort of info.
LP (Camembert)
On 11/6/03 9:26 AM, "Lee Pilich" lee@audiblerecords.com wrote:
At 05:07 06/11/2003 -0800, Jimbo wrote:
"Cory Hall" -- this one did get redirected to U. Cal Berkeley, which is absurd in my opinion. This is a well-known building, it may certainly have an article, even if the topic would not make it into 1.0. When was it built? What function does it serve? Who was the architect? What famous things happened there? All legitimate stuff.
Absolutely. But perhaps when you consider that the content of that page was nothing more than "Cory Hall is the Electrical Engineering building at the University of California, Berkeley. It is across the street from Soda Hall", and that the same content has been merged into the U Cal, Berk page, the redirect doesn't seem so "absurd" any more.
Actually, it does. The Cory Hall page was a legitimate stub. Again, one should hesitate to generate such stubs, but it's bad form to delete them.
Why?
RickK
The Cunctator cunctator@kband.com wrote:
. The Cory Hall page was a legitimate stub. Again, one should hesitate to generate such stubs, but it's bad form to delete them.
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
The Cunctator cunctator@kband.com wrote:
The Cory Hall page was a legitimate stub. Again, one should hesitate to generate such stubs, but it's bad form to delete them.
Rick wrote:
Why?
Because Wiki Is Not Paper. This is a legitimate topic about which we need a legitimate article. We should hesitate to create stubs because it's nice to have the "not an article" highlighting. But if one has been created, well, it's much better to just leave it alone or, if it really bugs you, improve it.
Right now, a search on google for 'Cory Hall' returns our page as the #10 hit. But when someone actually clicks on that link, they end up going to a generic UCB page -- which is *not* what they were searching on.
--Jimbo
Lee Pilich wrote:
Absolutely. But perhaps when you consider that the content of that page was nothing more than "Cory Hall is the Electrical Engineering building at the University of California, Berkeley. It is across the street from Soda Hall", and that the same content has been merged into the U Cal, Berk page, the redirect doesn't seem so "absurd" any more.
Well, possibly 'absurd' is not the right word. :-) But really, the article was a stub on a legitimate topic, and I see no *advantage* to the redirect. What was wrong with including the content into the UCB page (if it belongs there too) *and* leaving the page as it was?
Search on 'Cory Hall wikipedia' at google, and the #1 link is to our Cory Hall page. Search on just "Cory Hall" and the page is #10. But if you click on the page, you just get something you didn't want -- a general page on UCB.
But both seem reasonable positions, neither is absurd.
Maybe. :-) Absurd was a harsh word, and I regret using it.
Anyway, how we handle stub articles like these is a separate issue to deletions. Nobody's suggesting that we delete this sort of info.
Well, it's intimately related because I got this example off of the VfD page. The VfD page is too large in part because people are listing things for deletion that pretty obviously aren't candidates for deletion.
--Jimbo
At 07:54 06/11/2003 -0800, Jimbo wrote:
Lee Pilich wrote:
Absolutely. But perhaps when you consider that the content of that page was nothing more than "Cory Hall is the Electrical Engineering building at the University of California, Berkeley. It is across the street from Soda Hall", and that the same content has been merged into the U Cal, Berk page, the redirect doesn't seem so "absurd" any more.
Well, possibly 'absurd' is not the right word. :-) But really, the article was a stub on a legitimate topic, and I see no *advantage* to the redirect. What was wrong with including the content into the UCB page (if it belongs there too) *and* leaving the page as it was?
As I say, possible duplication of effort in expanding the info in the future. Person X comes along to the UCB page, thinks, "Oh, Cory Hall, I can write a bit more about that" and does so. Person Y comes along to [[Cory Hall]], and writes a bit more there. Repeat ten times. Maybe eventually we have two completely different paragraphs on exactly the same subject in different articles. Probably not ideal.
I mean, I'm not sure I'd agree with that reasoning in this particular case, but it's reasoning that quite a lot of people have used, and it does make a certain sense.
But both seem reasonable positions, neither is absurd.
Maybe. :-) Absurd was a harsh word, and I regret using it.
Well, I got a bit hung up about the word "absurd". I posted before coffee, and I regret that :)
The Cunctator wrote:
the redirect doesn't seem so "absurd" any more.
Actually, it does. The Cory Hall page was a legitimate stub. Again, one should hesitate to generate such stubs, but it's bad form to delete them.
Just to be clear - the page wasn't deleted. It was redirected to UCB and the info added there. I think in some cases this is the right thing to do with stubs (if they're never going to be more than stubs, for example, or maybe if they demand context to make any sense), though whether it was here is obviously arguable.
Right, back to this encyclopaedia thing...
Lee (Camembert)
Lee Pilich wrote:
As I say, possible duplication of effort in expanding the info in the future. Person X comes along to the UCB page, thinks, "Oh, Cory Hall, I can write a bit more about that" and does so. Person Y comes along to [[Cory Hall]], and writes a bit more there.
Is this really all that likely if the UCB article links to the Cory Hall article in the appropriate place?
I mean, I'm not sure I'd agree with that reasoning in this particular case, but it's reasoning that quite a lot of people have used, and it does make a certain sense.
Fair enough! I think that in this caes, that reasoning isn't very helpful, but I do concede that it is one possible cost of stub articles, particularly stub articles that aren't well-linked.
--Jimbo