5 ms·
No. I try to add wikipedia for Open Source Software that are used in many places but that aren't giant and not well known outside of tech circles, and they get
by dorfsmay 4y ago
No. I try to add wikipedia for Open Source Software that are used in many places but that aren't giant and not well known outside of tech circles, and they get deleted, typically for lack of noteriety or not enough external references, sometimes 5 or 6 years later.
It is very discouraging.
- mindcrime 4y agoIt is very discouraging. Exactly. What the Deletionists seem to miss is the extent to which their entire position is based on negativity, and how that negativity poisons the well for everybody. Imagine spending hours, or days, or weeks writing a detailed, well-documented, heavily-interlinked, high-quality page only to have it shot in the head in a Deletionist Driveby. Would you ever edit another Wikipedia page again after an experience like that?
- VLM 4y agoIf someone were literally being paid to push an agenda online as a day job, they would want to eliminate all organic desire to produce content leaving only the somewhat more influential paid content. Just because site X is not paying for user generated content, does not mean no people are being paid to generate content on site X. Always follow the money.
- throwanem 4y agoOkay, so, who by you is paying Wikipedia to peddle which agenda?
- IfOnlyYouKnew 4y agoThe pretzel logic people tie themselves into to make the world fit their narratives is simply astonishing.
- tptacek 4y agoWhat the Inclusionists seem to miss is the fact that an encyclopedia isn't The Hitchhiker's Guide or Angelfire, and that every page on the site incurs ongoing volunteer time to patrol for vandalism and corrections. Also, the idea that maybe it's OK if everyone doesn't edit Wikipedia pages; maybe some people should write secondary sources rather than tertiary ones.
- mindcrime 4y agoWhat the Inclusionists seem to miss is the fact that an encyclopedia isn't The Hitchhiker's Guide or Angelfire, No, we're all quite aware of that.
- tptacek 4y agoI claim that you are not, because your points don't cohere with the concept of an encyclopedia.
- grumple 4y agoWikipedia is not limited by the number of pages that exist in a volume. A given page existing doesn't generally make it harder to find another entry. The notability criterion is more applicable to an encyclopedia limited by disc or paper space.
- tptacek 4y agoSpace has nothing to do with the limitation. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chesterton%27s_fence https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chesterton%27s_fence
- 8bitsrule 4y agoWhat the Deletionists seem to miss is the fact that, since there's not a space problem, then perhaps Wikipedia doesn't have to limit itself to being an encyclopedia of 'articles'. Long ago, for example, lots of people kept 'Commonplace books'. Commonplaces are used by readers, writers, students, and scholars as an aid for remembering useful concepts or facts.... Something that isn't an article can still be very useful. EG Wikipedia has little to say about "Edmond Halley Sr." [sic; his name's Edmond Humphrey Halley], a father who proved critical to his son's success, and whose mysterious death complicated his son's life in multiple ways. I spent two hours online learning how and why (w/cites), but there's no room in the WP inn for publishing that summary.