[WikiEN-l] Philosophical question re sources

[Ryan Delaney]

On 3/21/06, Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/21/06, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> > We don't have to include every view merely because we can verify that
> > someone, somewhere holds that view.   Even if policy supports that (and
> I
> > strongly suspect it doesn't; see "undue weight"), that would be damaging
> the
> > article for the sake of process. Which is something we don't do on
> > Wikipedia.
>
> The thing is that the article is about Paul Smith's organisation,
> named "Safe Speed",


Looking at this article, I think the main problem is that it is /not/ about
the organization, but about the organization's arguments. The whole "Safe
Speed's Claims" and "Opposition and Criticism" examples could be summarized
in a few sentences.

Imagine if someone wrote up a solitary article with all that content in it.
It would be AFD'ed in a flash, and rightly so. But by grandfathering it into
an article that is nominally about something else, they've succeeded in
getting a soapbox for advocacy. Kill it with fire.

Ryan