Re: [Wikipedia-l] What happens when you use "global" standards for regional writing?

Let's put it this way: Wikipedia sees no flaw in accepting the unquestioned logic that if-you-don't-have-a-cyber-presence-or-aren't-mentioned-there-you-don't-exist-or-are-anyway-non-notable. This stacks the cards strongly against those from non-English backgrounds, those from the less digitised parts of the world, and those who may be working in non-print/non-textual media (e.g. people who have worked for the Urdu service of the BBC, for instance, as it struck me when a page on journalist Reba Shahid came up for deletion recently). I'm attempting to do two things here: * Question the logic of such a position, and the impact it has on large parts of the planet. * Ask whether issues like 'non-notability' need to be such a big issue, considering both the diversity of the planet, and also the fact that in the case of the Wikipedia, space isn't a huge problem as in the printed text. Those interested will refer to any entry they want; "non-notable" entries would automatically get less traction. Let the 'market' of information-seekers decide what is 'non-notable'. Take an example of a prominent person from the world of Konkani literature in Goa: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhavi_Sardesai who also edits the only literary joural in that language here. Her work is all in the Konkani language (Devanagari script) and thus not visible to those on Wikipedia who raise questions of notability. This is a serious flaw if not systemic bias. FN On 13 December 2014 at 16:15, Gerard Meijssen &lt;gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: -- -- P +91-832-2409490 M 9822122436 Twitter: @fn Facebook: fredericknoronha Latest from Goa,1556: http://goa1556.in/book/goa-in-sepia-tinted-postcards/ <http://goa1556.in>