[WikiEN-l] No "list of X" article unless there's already a good "X" article

[Ray Saintonge]

Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:

> I wish there were widespread general consensus that there should not
>
>be a "list of X" article unless there is already a high-quality  
>article on the topic of "X." And the list should begin as a section  
>within the "X" article and should not be broken out until it becomes  
>unmanageably long.
>
In many cases that's fine.

>I wish there were widespread general consensus that every item in a  
>"list of X" article should be individually referenced. A year or so  
>ago I tried checking out such lists, particularly those of which it  
>was asserted that a reference was not needed because "references can  
>be found in the linked article," and my experience was this was  
>usually not true.
>
That gave you an opportunity to add the references to the linked articles.

>The reason why references are needed is that in many cases list  
>inclusion involves a matter of judgement, and the judgement should be  
>that of an authoritative third party, not that of Wikipedia editors. 
>
A lot depends on the saus that you accord to "List" articles.  I tend to 
treat them as a combination Index and To-do reference.  Until standard 
practice in books requires references to the index of the book, I don't 
see why we should be so taken with ourselves as to require references there.

Some exceptions would still need to be made such as or lists where 
membership would be derogatory.

Ec