[WikiEN-l] Has an article in a paper encyclopedia, but it's "Not Notable"

[Wily D]

Sjakkalle

Don't worry about labels.  The reality is just that there's a backlog
of articles at AfD which need someone to argue for their keeping, but
not for their deleting.  I've been labelled an "exteme inclusionist"
or an "inclusionist troll" because I almost always argue Keep at AfD.
But why do I do this?  If I see an AfD that should be a "delete",
there are better things to do with my time than articulate the
"delete" arguement - someone else will get that.  Keeping is
different.

Cheers
Brian

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Sigvat Kuekiatngam Stensholt
<st09039 at mi.uib.no> wrote:
> I am in one sense amused, in another sense astonished, that Ellen
> Hambro, the leader of what is effectively the Norwegian Environmental
> Protection Agency, up for AFD, and even more astonished to see some long
> time contributors voting to delete it.
>
> Here is a fact: Ellen Hambro is covered in a paper encyclopedia, "Store
> norske leksikon", which is the largest, and most well-known of all
> contemporary general-purpose Norwegian encyclopedias written on 15
> volumes of paper.
>
> And yet I see people rejecting this encyclopedia as "not intellectually
> independent" and "crypto-official".
>
> I would not be writing this list if this were a one-off occurrence, but
> this is the third time in only a few weeks that I have seen encyclopedia
> subjects (and this means: has a separate article in a general-purpose
> paper encyclopedia) nominated for deletion. The other two are the
> articles [[Glamour (presentation)]] and [[Star Shipping]], the latter
> which was nominated for *speedy* deletion, and had that speedy tag stuck
> on it for several hours.
>
> There comes a point when we need to do a reality check. The reality is
> that we are in danger of deleting a subject which a commercial
> general-purpose print encyclopedia has deemed notable enough to be
> within their limited pages. Deleting any of these articles will be an
> action more profound than deleting Mzoli's, Terry Shannon, or Pownce
> would ever be.
>
> I fear that the zeal to delete articles in the name of enforcing
> policies and the notability guidelines are starting to encroach upon the
> fundamentals Wikipedia's mission to be an encyclopedia. We cannot
> possibly claim to be comprehensive if we start deleting subjects covered
> in the very works we want to surpass. I really don't consider myself an
> "inclusionist", but is it really all that "inclusionist" to support
> keeping subjects traditionally covered by encyclopedias?
>
> Sjakkalle
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>