Occasionally, such as in the case of [[Google Answers]] there is merit in
keeping them seperate articles. But even though wikipedia is not paper, how
would you even go about linking to Baby Gary's family's page? (using the old
example here)
Would we have a [[List of people]] that takes up more than our current
database by itself?
And how would we verify these people if technically ssn # records (as are
others) are to be held confidential?
On 11/20/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 11/20/05, Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2005/11/20, Sam Korn <smoddy(a)gmail.com>om>:
So every
webpage is notable? You can get information from the page
itself
and from the Internet Archive.
Only if there is stuff to write about it. If not, it can happily be
merged into a "list of websites" or some such thing.
I was talking of web pages, not websites. And how do you decide if
there's
something to write about it?
--
Andre Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
Just because something is notable doesn't mean it has to have its own
separate article. I'd say most, if not all, information about web
pages would be better off merged with something else. The way "you
decide" if there's something to write about it is the same way "you
decide" whether or not any bit of information improves an article or
makes it worse, using a wiki.
People, on the other hand, tend to have separate identities from one
another, and merging generally isn't a good idea. I especially hate
when one person is redirected to another person, and I don't think
that should ever be done. "Baby Gary who's 3 months old" might find a
better home on a page about his family though, at least for a while.
But please not as a separate section unto itself.
That's another pet peeve I have - when multiple different articles are
"merged" into a single one in a way that puts each article as a
separate headline (sometimes even with its own external links and
other subsections). I guess this is done as a compromise between
those who want to delete the information and those who want to keep
it, but it seems like the worst of both worlds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Answers (a redirect to [[List of
Google services and tools]]) is an example of where this disgusting
technique takes place. I fail to see how this is a better way of
organizing things. A list should be a list. An article on Google
services and tools should discuss the relationship of the tools and
services to one another, and discuss general trends which Google is
making, not present a bunch of separate articles stuck together on one
page.
Anthony
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
~Ilya N.