[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia article on [[Santorum (neologism)]]

[Andreas Kolbe]

--- On Mon, 23/5/11, Ken Arromdee <arromdee at rahul.net> wrote:

> From: Ken Arromdee <arromdee at rahul.net>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia article on [[Santorum (neologism)]]
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Monday, 23 May, 2011, 21:56
> I'm skeptical that we should have an
> article.
> 
> The reason: Wikipedia is on the Internet.  If
> Wikipedia has an article
> about something whose promoter specifically intends to
> spread it on the
> Internet, it is impossible to separate reporting from
> participation.  It's
> a loophole in the definition of neutrality that doing
> things which help
> one side of a dispute doesn't break neutrality, simply
> because our
> intentions are neutral--even though our effects are not.
> 
> This brings to mind GNAA.  GNAA is a troll group who
> intentionally gave
> themselves an offensive name so that even mentioning them
> helped them troll.
> Wikipedia had a hard time getting rid of the article about
> them, because
> we can't say "by using their name, we're helping their
> goals" in deciding
> whether to have an article.  It was finally deleted by
> stretching the
> notability rules instead.
> 
> And in a related question, I'd ask: Should we have an
> article "Richard Gere
> gerbil rumor"?  (As long as our article describes the
> rumor as debunked, of
> course--otherwise we would be directly violating BLP.) Some
> of the
> justifications for that and for this sound similar.


It's a good comparison. There are plenty of "reliable sources" to satisfy
notability:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22richard+gere%22+gerbil#q=%22richard+gere%22+gerbil&hl=en&tbm=nws&source=lnt&tbs=ar:1&sa=X&ei=3m7dTcizNYS08QPCjdUB&ved=0CBIQpwUoBQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=fa06e4f4a78ee6ed

We could summarise all of these, neutrally, in an article, quoting four 
dozen journalists on the controversy.

However, we shouldn't. (No doubt someone will start an article now, and
knowing Wikipedia, it will probably make DYK and GA. Ah well.)

Interested readers are directed to:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/celebrities/a/richard_gere.htm 

As well as our very own: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerbilling

Andreas