[WikiEN-l] My irrelevant hatnote disambiguation policy

[Matt Brown]

On 9/4/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps "mock" is the wrong word.  I agree with Steve that seeing a
> reference to some obscure band's second album or some equally obscure
> video game character on almost every science or history article is
> highly annoying and detracts from the seriousness of the subject.

I don't get this 'detracts from the seriousness of the subject'.  Do
science or history articles get all embarassed to be in the same
encyclopedia as more "trivial" subjects?  Do the writers of such
articles, or the readers?

And should we care?

One of the strengths of Wikipedia is its trivia.  Seriously.  It's the
breadth of our coverage that makes us appealing, and allows us to be a
one-stop source of information for the curious.

To be honest, a good proportion of the history and science is as
trivial as the music and videogames.  This does not mock the science,
nor the history.

-Matt