4 ms·

Citing the Wikipedia articles' existence is a curious argument to make when an article titled "40% of Wikipedia is under threat from deletionists" [1] was just

• FrozenVoid 10y ago
  Obviously obscure content will not survive unless it somehow gains fans willing to guard the page from these people, who pretend wikipedia is paper encyclopedia with limited budget for "notable" topics. They have to defend citations, perceived bias/neutrality and fight merge/deletion votes, gain allies with admins once it reaches arbitration and explain the article "notability" each time its questioned(and articles can lose "notability status" once one of these pedantic autists start questioning every line and word, deleting everything not following exact rules). In fact an isolated article, with new content or very few backlinks will not even be accepted and get speedily deleted before it gets worked into something acceptable to wikipedians. There has to be an alternative to this.
• a3_nm 10y ago
  Despite deletionists' efforts, I doubt that any long-standing mathematical conjecture which can reasonably be called "famous" (to a general, non-specialist audience) does not currently have a Wikipedia page. My point about the article is just that I found it annoying to be made to believe that this was about a very major result and find out later that the claims of fame had been exaggerated.