[WikiEN-l] Re: HOWTOs/Recipes/Instructions and other imperative content

[Anthere]

I understand that.
Sorry if I am not relaxed, but I can't get it.
I might be more relaxed if the french cooking recipees were not moved 
out of this encyclopedia, some with no links left to the recipee itself, 
  not to mention cases where the article is just plain deleted.
Some of these recipees have encyclopedic value, they are typical 
examples of a certain way of life, they are typical examples of cooking 
techniques. Just a dozen of recipees do not impair the quality of highly 
cultural articles, at least no more than the thousand of tiny american 
city articles. We have room. It is not because another project is about 
cooking that cooking should just disappear from Wikipedia. Plus it 
breaks international links, for other wikipedias consider recipees have 
value. Plus it is unnice for all the contributors (often newbies) who 
wrote the recipee, and who do not find articles any more.
How do these few dozens recipees bother any one ? When they are famous 
dishes, they should not be deleted. That is bad. This is destroying 
information. We *have* room. And some believe this is valuable information.

And the solution is not to go claim consensus and update policies when 
someone try to discuss the matter.

Thinking about it, a bit of promotion :-)

This page is directly linked from our front page. It should be enriched, 
but well, you will get the idea I think

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recettes_du_mois

Isnot that neat ?

Ant

Fred Bauder a écrit:
> This always seemed wrong to me. I'd like to see a whole lot more relaxed
> attitude.
> 
> Fred
> 
> 
>>From: Anthere <anthere8 at yahoo.com>
>>Reply-To: anthere8 at yahoo.com, English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:39:54 +0100
>>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: HOWTOs/Recipes/Instructions and other imperative
>>content
>>
>>That seems like a very convoluted set of sentences; But, whatever the
>>wording, many people expressed that they did not agree with such a
>>policy. So, please, do not add it to what wikipedia is not, in order to
>>ban recipes thereafter. There is no consensus on this, and several
>>people expressed the feeling some recipees are perfectly okay to wikipedia.
>>
>>Typically, rules that are set with no consensus are rules that I do not
>>respect :-)
>>
>>David Friedland a écrit:
>>
>>>The following seems to be the general idea that people have about how-to
>>>type content on Wikipedia. i.e. that it belongs on wikibooks, not
>>>wikipedia. I couldn't find anywhere where this was written out as
>>>policy, so this is my proposed addition to [[What Wikipedia is not]]:
>>>
>>>Under what Wikipedia articles are not:
>>>* Instructions. Wikipedia seeks to be informative, not instructional.
>>>Therefore, things like how-tos, recipes, and other types of information
>>>that provide instruction on something are not appropriate on Wikipedia.
>>>They are appropriate, however, on Wikibooks, and articles that contain
>>>only instructional material should be moved to the appropriate area on
>>>Wikibooks. It is possible that information about instructions are
>>>appropriate on Wikipedia, but it should be presented in the indicative
>>>mood, and not the imperative mood that so distinctively marks
>>>instructional material.
>>>
>>>I know the wording is a little weak, but it's my first attempt.
>>>
>>>Since the WikiEN-l is for discussing policy, I thought I'd bring it up here.
>>>
>>>- David
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-
> 
> l