[WikiEN-l] Thousands of *awful* articles on websites

[Gregory Maxwell]

Even ignoring the fact that claims of non-biased are meaningless for
non-verifyable articles ... It simply doesn't scale.

One shouldn't do something that would cause harm if everyone did it.
(He says while top posting, alas)

More than anything else people learn how to write Wikipedia by reading
Wikipedia... We now are seeing people write fair use criteria for
clearly free images because that's the examples they see.  We must
lead by example. While we can't find every problem we can not survive
if we adopt a policy of ignoring problems we've found simply because a
single case won't kill us.


This is a distinct issue from inclusion vs deletion.

Frankly, all mentions of deletion vs inclusion these days just become
an excuse for some of our contributors to express their hate for other
contributors.  All the particapants in these arguments are managing to
accomplish is the distruction of their respect from Wikipedians who
are not members of their clique. This factionalism serves no one.



On 1/3/07, Bogdan Giusca <liste at dapyx.com> wrote:
> Wednesday, January 3, 2007, 7:58:27 PM, The Cunctator wrote:
>
> > It's a perfectly fine, non-biased article that is hurting NOONE by its
> > existence and represents real effort by the contributors. Why does it need
> > to be deleted? WHY?
>
> That's not a valid argument. If I write a fine, non-bias article on myself,
> it wouldn't hurt NO ONE, either and it would be a real effort from me,
> the contributor, right?
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>