3 ms·
I agree, I don't mind lists like "Largest countries" as that is fairly definitive but when you get into subjective lists of things that are hard to properly def
by barbegal 7y ago
I agree, I don't mind lists like "Largest countries" as that is fairly definitive but when you get into subjective lists of things that are hard to properly define, measure or record like "costliest hurricane damage"[1], "longest-living organisms"[2] or "deadliest animals"[3] then the articles become a joke.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Atlantic_hurricane_records https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Atlantic_hurricane_rec...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest-living_organisms#Animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest-living_organis...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_animals_to_humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_animals_to_h...
- y-c-o-m-b 7y agoHow would you approach those things? Do we altogether avoid making those lists because they don't fit a strict criteria? I think they serve a very useful purpose and taken in the correct context, are incredibly informative. At the very least it stimulates curiosity which is a positive effect in itself.
- dwohnitmok 7y agoAn age old question. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Conflicting_Wikipedia_philosophies https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Conflicting_Wikipedia_philos...