On 11/28/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) alphasigmax@gmail.com wrote:
George Herbert wrote:
On 11/28/06, Tony Jacobs gtjacobs@hotmail.com wrote:
What definition of "notable" are you using? The only definition of
that
word that matters at Wikipedia is: "A topic is notable if it has been
the
subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the subject itself." That's not true of GNAA, ergo
they're
not "notable", which simply means that it's impossible to write a
properly
verifiable article about them. We don't want to keep an unverfiable article around, no matter how much "consensus" may hoot and holler for it, so
we
delete it.
People who want to know about GNAA can still look them up at ED, which
has
no problem covering topics that we eschew.
The problem with this trend is that it relegates certain aspects of
internet
culture which tend not to get press coverage into the dustbin.
As much as I hate GNAA and everyone involved in it, it IS notable among
the
realm of internet troll activities.
If we have the (harmless, real, but equally badly documented) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt.fan.warlord entry....
(Offline at the moment, so I can't read the article) - Was Warlord from MIT?
I don't know where he went to school, but "Warlord of the West" was Dan Kline at (somethingorother).trw.com in the 1991 timeframe.
The newsgroup came out of UC Berkeley. It was locally newgrouped by as far as I recall uncredited parties (probably Shannon Appel or one of the local BIFFsters), spread to other nearby commercial and educational institutions, and then if I recall right I sent the first global newgroup for it on a dare in early 1991, though I never was closely involved with the group.