The Cunctator wrote:
One of the great flaws with the traditional approach to history is its bias towards the narrative of the hero--that the current world is best understood as a single dramatic storyline with a few important protagonists and antagonists. Perhaps you believe that is a complete and accurate representation of the world, but I don't. I believe that the world, society, etc. are best understood as products of the interaction of billions of individuals. To gain a perfectly accurate picture of the world, we'd need to know all of their stories. The closer we come to that the better.
Of course, one would want to start with those that are collectively accepted as pivotal.
But we should not exclude knowledge in the pursuit of understanding.
So I take it you are proposing that we drop Wikipedia's long-held claim that it is not a geneological database? Everyone who has ever lived thus deserves to be included, as long as the facts are verifiable? Every event that ever took place deserves to be included? Should I upload a scan of my diploma (verifiable by contacting my university's registrar)? How about articles on about 75 of my relatives who were refugees from Turkey during the Greek-Turkish war (but were otherwise not notable)--verifiable by Greek government immigration records. How about a professor of mine who is currently on leave in Pennsylvania (also verifiable)? My neighbor, who once ran unsuccessfuly for school board (verifiable from the election records)? This just seems ridiculous to me.
-Mark