If that's really what he says, then I guess I am at the wrong project. I would like Wikipedia to be an encyclopedia, that's something else than a collection of all possible knowledge. My neighbour's phone number has no place in Wikipedia, in my opinion.

Aside from personal information being prohibited on grounds on privacy, Wikipedia is not a dictionary nor directory, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT

However, Wikipedia already includes some telephone numbers such as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/555_(telephone_number) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Telephone_numbers

Well, unless like me you consider the inclusion of tons of trivial and worthless information along with the good stuff a problem.

The problem is who decides what is trivial and worthless. I've already mentioned that Wikipedia contains articles on all 1000 of the top 1000 asteroids. I personally consider Asteroid #868, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/868_Lova to be trivial and worthless.

There is a list of the top 1000 asteroids, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_asteroids_%281-1000%29 and a list of notable asteroids: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_noteworthy_asteroids

But I see no harm in including all this "worthless" information, and I suspect that astronomers who specialise in asteroids would consider it more interesting and worthy than the rest of us.

The information is not misrepresented, and is verifiable. And I am reassured that Wikipedia is inclusive of such trivia, and perhaps one day, there will be more information on said asteroid.

Wikipedia still includes more traditional information, and perhaps many articles that we would both agree to being more notable, and more worthy.

Regards,

Ian Tresman www.plasma-universe.com