[WikiEN-l] We need a policy against vote-stacking

[Peter Ansell]

On 5/6/06, Philip Welch <wikipedia at philwelch.net> wrote:
> It's not about someone (me) liking one thing or another. It's about
> objective importance and notability. Pokemon's influence even within
> contemporary popular culture is minimal outside a devoted community
> of fans.

How objective can even a group of people be? They will all bring to a
debate their preconceptions to both importance and notability. It is
possible that some would say that any but the most popular nineteenth
century musical composers have had little influence outside of the
classical music arena. However, it would seem silly not to allow
articles on more than just the top four or five composers from the
nineteenth century simply because they haven't had mainstream impact.
I think that an encyclopedia should document more then just the
majority subjects in society. What practical harm is there to an
online encyclopedia having articles which are well written and detail
verifiable facts about the less well known aspects of "devoted
communities"?

Peter