[WikiEN-l] Comic book articles and fancruft (was: Pattern copyvios involving...)
saintonge at telus.net
Sat Oct 21 14:38:34 UTC 2006
Earle Martin wrote:
>On 20/10/06, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>>Earle Martin wrote:
>>>I think Phil is speaking from having read numerous fictional character
>>>articles, not implying that his feelings stem from this incident. (I
>>>happen to agree with him; the amount of blithering fancruft is
>>Yet he's using this incident as his "excuse" for it. If this incident
>>itself had nothing specifically to do with his proposal and he was just
>>tossing in an old dream of his, why was it initially focused on just
>>Marvel comics characters?
>Because a wise man once said, "Pick the low-hanging fruit." Everything
>has to start somewhere, jihad on fancruft included.
Jihad is normally associated with religious fanatics.
>>There's reasons why BLP is "ruthless" with
>>regard to biographies of living people and those reasons are completely
>>inapplicable to biographies of fictional characters. If you want to
>>propose being equally "ruthless" for fictional characters I want to see
>>a reason that's just as strong.
>I thought having an encyclopedia that didn't suck was a pretty strong
>reason. Do I need to elaborate on what I think that entails? I hope
>not; I would have thought it was fairly self-evident.
I'll save you the problem of embarassing yourself with an elaboration.
An encyclopedia that doesn't suck recognizes that different people have
different ideas about what is important, and respects them for that.
What could be more self-evident than that.
More information about the WikiEN-l