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

[Daniel R. Tobias]

On 5 May 2006 at 12:57, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5/5/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It just doesn't seem fair to delete an article on one school of a
> > given type while keeping others. And I suspect "notability" there is
> > very much dependent on the social milieu of the voters...
> 
> So you are saying there is no difference between Eton and Sacred Heart
> school, Nowheresville

There are some categories of things where having a complete set of 
articles on them would seem to be a net benefit, even if some of the 
members are of relatively questionable notability.  One of them is 
the set of cities, towns, villages, hamlets, etc.; for the United 
States, these were filled in a long time ago by a robot, and having 
such gazetteer info handy can be useful even if some of the places 
are pretty marginal.  Many of those geographical entries have since 
been fleshed out into well-done articles, but even the ones with just 
the raw data can be useful.  Doing a similar thing with the places 
(however minor) in other countries would be a positive step even if 
some might call it "geocruft".

Similarly, it's good that there's an article on every one of the 
popes of the Catholic Church, even though some of the early ones have 
a pretty much complete lack of info about them personally or about 
any notable things they might have done while in office (if any).

I don't know whether schools are one of the things that falls into a 
similar situation, but there may be some who believe so.

-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/