[WikiEN-l] The new verifiability policy

[Tony Sidaway]

On 2/28/06, charles matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Well, I hope people really are behaving well, all over the site.  I don't
> see how anyone can be that confident.
>
> It is like it has been said: the slope of allowing the most fiercely
> contested articles set the policy is extremely slippery.  Cutting before
> querying on Talk 'and do you have a source for that?' is still bad practice
> (still cuts across 'assume good faith', for example).
>

It's really bad.  Look at what has been done to our websites
guidelines *since* the webcomics case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ANotability_%28websites%29&diff=40663958&oldid=25445902

Firstly, notice the false claim that a mere *guideline* is applied by
*most* Wikipedia editors, and then look at what has been rejected:

Having been picked up by a major webcomics publisher. These include:  	
- 	#*[[Keenspot]] 	
- 	#*[[Modern Tales]] and its sister sites: [[Serializer]], [[Graphic
Smash]], and [[Girlamatic]]
- 	#*[[Blank Label Comics]] 	
- 	#*[[Dayfree Press]] 	
- 	#*[[Dumbrella]] 	
- 	#Having won a significant award, such as: 	
- 	#* [[Eisner Award]] 	
- 	#* [[Ignatz Award]] 	
- 	#* [[Webby Award]] 	
- 	#* [[Web Cartoonists' Choice Awards]]


In short, *all* reference to actual, significant web publishing has
been rejected as a webiste notability guidelines.