[WikiEN-l] Oversized criticism sections and WP:UNDUE (was:Notability and ski resorts)

[stevertigo]

Jay Litwyn <brewhaha at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> wrote:
> I realize that I am in a subject that might not be encyclopedic, because it
> is controversial, and I avoid it, however much I want the article to come
> to my decision. If a torrent of verbiage and commercially, racially, or
> ideologically motivated information has established a concept that is at
> odds with a foundation, then maybe it does not require my attack. It should
> fall on its own. If it seems to hav a life of its own, that is just the
> nature of politics, where I do not want to be.

You actual point is (mostly) understood, that (restated) certain
things attract a "torrent of verbiage" and therefore it may be best to
simply deal with the torrent and let the chips fall where they may,
rather than try to nullify extreme peaks in signal. Collaboration,
when it was still relevant, solved this not by hard limitations, or
even hard compression, but by a combination of soft compression
techniques and intelligent processing techniques: breaking it down
into its substantive parts and addressing each.

As a meta comment, this post is actually rather focused and on-topic,
Jay. I notice though that you keep repeating this disclaimer about you
'are/have-to/want-to/will-be' "avoiding" controversial subjects, which
- even though it's apparently why you were banned from the site - has
nothing at all to do with the current conversation. One of the ways to
stay on point is to keep your thoughts organized, but also to keep
this context separated from others. When you show that you are keeping
things organized and sufficiently separated, I'm sure you will be able
get your edit privileges back. You might also pick up a thing or two
from people on this list and elsewhere (like some of the various
dialects of doublespeak we use ;-) ).

-Stevertigo