[WikiEN-l] Original research or common sense inferral?

[Bryan Derksen]

Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 14:42:01 -0600, Bryan Derksen
> <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> 
>>>>> What, like the personal essays on character traits of various
>>>>> characters in video games?  I would say that is *objectively* crap :-)
>>>> You'd be wrong. 
>>> Not really.  Personal essays are not allowed by policy, after all.
> 
>> You're shifting the goalposts from the subject of the article to the
>> quality and style of the writing in it, reread the part of my response
>> that you snipped and that should be clear. It's a fallacy along the
>> lines of "pies laced with arsenic are dangerous, ergo we should ban pies."
> 
> Not really.  I was treating the concept as a whole: personal essays on
> the character traits of video game characters.  Every such essay I
> have seen has sucked royally.  I don't discount the possibility that
> properly cited encyclopaedic treatment of the same subject may be
> possible, and it would be quite refreshing to see such a section.

And again you've snipped the portion of my reply where I addressed that
very issue. Go ahead and rewrite the essay, I've never had a problem
with that. My objection is to your claim that you can determine the
objective crappitude of it. A well-written personal essay could well
contain plenty of useful material to be incorporated into the article,
and even a poorly-written one could have a few tidbits. Outright
deletion is not the best approach.

Also, could you perhaps explain how this is relevant to the university
crest and top gear issues? We seem to be drifting here.