[WikiEN-l] Deletionism fails to serve the readers

[Guy Chapman aka JzG]

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:33:10 -0700, William Pietri
<william at scissor.com> wrote:

>This brings up something that has been troubling me for months. And 
>doubly so now that I'm handling speedy deletions and the like. What is 
>this "notability" thing and why does it matter beyond V, RS, and NPOV?

It's a shorthand.  Something which has verifiable, neutral,
non-trivial, independent sources and rises above the level of a
directory entry ([[WP:NOT]]).  I recommend [[User:Uncle G/On
notability]] as a way of understanding what proponents of a notability
guideline think.

In the end, we are all both deletionists and inclusionists.  If we did
not want to include content, we would not be here but we all decide
that some things are too trivial to have an article, despite the fact
that they can be verified (the bus stop at the end of my road, for
example, has at least three separate sources for its existence, but is
utterly unremarkable in every meaningful respect).

In the differences between personal definitions of what is "too
trivial" lie the great wars of AfD.

Guy (JzG)
-- 
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG