[Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... issues from the Third World

[Steve]

I don't think it would be a grave error, but our opinions about this do not
matter. There are people who do think its heresy.

Because these people are so focused on notability and reduction of error,
these like minds collect at AFD/Speedy delete. Since Wikipedia is a
volunteer effort, people will gravitate towards jobs which fulfill their
particular passion. So, I think this rule explains why deletionists are
attracted to AFD as a hangout.

Its kind of like the tenant here in American law (and probably elsewhere)
that says its better to let 100 guilty people free than to send 1 innocent
person to jail. However, the inverse of this is true at AFD.

In the west, where something like an Oral tradition/history is so foreign to
us its not hard for us to write it off as hearsay, non-notable, even gossip.
And yet any random thing that our news media decides to attend to for the
minute becomes instantly notable. There's no way to appeal this because its
just what Wikipedia has become. At the very least I hope this discussion is
generating rhetoric for you to use in AFD debates against deletionists. It
sounds like a lot of very wonderful things are being lost.


-S

On 1/8/07, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org> wrote:
>
> Hmmm... some interesting issues being raised below. Just for argument
> sake: what happens if an "un-notable" entry makes it to Wikipedia?
> Would it be a grave error? Notability, after all, is mostly related to
> context. Would Shakespeare have been as "noted" a writer, if he had to
> be born in, say, Upper Egypt?
>
> I think the problem lies elsewhere. The trouble is: people or
> institutions being packaged to be what they are not. Or bloated claims
> about institutions or organisations or individuals.
>
> Rather than just delete entries for being un-notable, perhaps we need
> to find ways to ensure that what's written is both accurate and
> tallies with the reality. --FN
>
> On 08/01/07, Steve <subsume at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe this is a rookie opinion, but I think that the AFD process tends
> to
> > attract people who are focused on keeping wikipedia "uncluttered" and
> > "relevant". They're always going to "err on the side of delete" and
> that's
> > that. You can present anything to the people at AFD, but its a systemic
> > habit. Those aren't just going to undo because of one person's polite
> > suggestion.
> >
> > While I happen to think deletionists could be restrained greatly without
> > loss to Wikipedia (since the articles they're deleting are hardly well
> > connected and widely viewed), I'm just one opinion. Over the years I've
> > noticed a kind of institutional insecurity grow in Wikipedia, over fears
> our
> > pedia is being perceived as full of unverified internet rabble.
> >
> > -S
> --
> FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> http://fn.goa-india.org  http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com
> http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>