[Wikimedia-l] crazy deletionists!
tarc at hotmail.com
Tue Jul 3 13:35:02 UTC 2012
I think that is a very dismissive misreading of the discussion.
Some people have it in their heads that "appears in reliable sources equates to article-worthiness", but the problem here is that the doings of celebrities is covered in excruciating detial by the media, including what tey eat, the clothes they wear, and so on. Same for some politicians, such as every Thanksgiving some poor sod gets to stand outside the White House gate and breathlessly report what is on the President's table, or at XMas the reports of what the First Family bought each other. Reliably sourced? Yes. Encyclopedic worthiness of "White House Thanksgiving 2009 Dinner Table" ? None at all.
> Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 12:02:46 +0100
> From: tom at tommorris.org
> To: wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] crazy deletionists!
> On Tuesday, 3 July 2012 at 10:15, Svip wrote:
> > I can't believe _I_ am not the ultimate ruler on what is valuable
> > enough to get on Wikipedia. It seems most of the delete comments on
> > the Justin Bieber article are mostly people who dislike Justin Bieber.
> > Surely Lady Gaga on Twitter should be deleted as well? Or perhaps
> > that is different, because they like Lady Gaga more than they like
> > Justin Bieber.
> >  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Gaga_on_Twitter
> To be fair, 'Ashton Kutcher on Twitter' is also up for deletion too. In both the Kutcher and Bieber case, there's a lot of "I don't like it, therefore it can't be notable!"
> I just cannot see any legitimate argument for deletion being presented. They all basically boil down to "don't like it!"
> Tom Morris
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
More information about the Wikimedia-l