On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:16:02 -0500, Philip Sandifer sandifer@english.ufl.edu wrote:
McCloud is somebody who knows comics. He quite literally wrote the book on them. In the course of the conversation it became clear that he was pretty well completely fed up with Wikipedia. And it should be noted, this comes from someone who has been on the forefront of digital technology debates several times. He makes clear his admiration for the concept of Wikipedia. He makes clear his admiration for how Wikipedia got started. His problem is with how it works now.
The problem he has? Notability. Specifically the arbitrary and capricious way in which AfD targets things, questions their notability, and uses guidelines that make no sense from the outside.
Well I admire Scott McCloud too, and I thought his piece "I can't stop thinking" was visionary in its day, but in the end if the system does not support a directory of webcomics because they fail to meet the sourcing guidelines, is that strictly a problem with Wikipedia processes, or is it a misconception about what Wikipedia is?
Or put another way, how exactly *are* we supposed to discern the difference between unsourced articles on webcomics created by the article author and being spammed, and legitimate comics? I'd be happy to rely on expert editors if it weren't for the fact that in at least one case one such editor argued long and loud for keep but *no* reliable secondary sources could be found at all.
Perhaps the solution is for known authorities like McCloud to sign up and participate. I for one would give significant weight to his opinion in closing a deletion debate.
Guy (JzG)