On 4/16/07, Jossi Fresco <jossifresco(a)mac.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 2007, at 11:48 AM, Sam Blacketer wrote:
I agree with Jossi - the article isn't really
a how-to guide at the
moment (eg "if you're planning on hanging yourself, make sure you
measure the floor to ceiling height and choose a room that's taller
than you and the rope").
Some sentences are close to being a how to, and in any case most of
these are not sourced. On that basis alone, the article can be
cleaned up without too much of a fuss.
Perhaps, but what is an article on [[suicide method]], in its essence?
It's a dictionary definition, a list, and a bunch of descriptions of
individual methods which really belong on their own pages. Granted,
an article on [[suicide method]] might be able to summarize the most
common or noteworthy methods, but shouldn't the article on [[suicide]]
do that?
The strawman examples of potentially irresponsible articles seem much
more fitting in an encyclopedia. They actually describe something,
rather than presenting a list of other things. Remove the
descriptions of the individual methods (which are already there in
their own articles), and you have a one line dictionary definition.
Anthony