On Dec 31, 2007 10:30 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 2007 5:32 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Before you go off too far on this idea, I'm about to float something on wikien-l about a new "Trivia:" namespace...
If it's encyclopaedic, it should go in the main namespace, if it's not, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Either way, a trivia namespace is not required.
Trivia is not for non-encyclopedic stuff. It's for stuff about which notability has not achieved consensus, but which has some claim to notability.
That just moves the goalposts, it doesn't solve anything. You would still need notability requirements in the trivia namespace, just weaker ones.
Yes.
If you can do without them in the trivia namespace, you can do without them in the main namespace, and then there's no need for a trivia namespace.
That does not logically follow at all.
Whatever way you look at it, either a trivia namespace won't work, or it's not needed.
This does not logically follow at all.
This should go to the discussion when I post to wikien-l, but ... please think it out.