[WikiEN-l] We need a policy against vote-stacking
Daniel R. Tobias
dan at tobias.name
Sun May 7 17:16:35 UTC 2006
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/
More information about the WikiEN-l