3 ms·

I think you are setting the bar too high. Nothing is perfect, but Wikipedia is great. If you have some better idea how these things should be handled, then ple

I think you are setting the bar too high. Nothing is perfect, but Wikipedia is great. If you have some better idea how these things should be handled, then please explain.

rsync 14y ago
This is mildly off-topic, but since we're talking about the little hitlers that dominate wikipedia content, here goes... I (John Kozubik / rsync.net) will donate USD 10,000 to wikipedia if they change their official stance to inclusionism, and adopt a "all well formed articles belong" stance. Yes, most of what is in deletionpedia is garbage. Yes, it deserved to be deleted. But somewhere in there are thousands of articles that people spent hours on, in good faith, zapped away due to "notability". If it's well formed, it gets in.
- bane 14y ago
  I just got bit by this recently...there used to be an excellent article on frisson in WP. Full of great information and a nice collection of external resources. It was 2 or 3 pages long and was up for several years if I recall. It was probably one of the best summaries of the topic on the Internet at one time. It's gone, redirects to "cold chills" [1] which is not only incorrect, it's a far inferior article to begin with. Having given up on contributing or editing things in WP due to the rampant and frustrating deletionism I have no idea how to even begin the labyrinthine process of getting the old article returned. The only thing I can find of it is a history where sometime in 2007 it was marked for redirection...but I know that it worked at least through 2010 and into 2011 (my own comment history has a link to it back then). 1 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisson
  - rsync 14y ago
    Frisson is not in deletionpedia - perhaps they do not retain articles that were simply merged, etc. Your frustration is shared by many, many people. Here's a well formed article on a software package: http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=EleBBS_(deleted_10_Jul_2008_at_04:15) http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=EleBBS_(d... that was deleted because some kids hadn't heard of RA before. There are thousands of these.
    - bane 14y ago
      > perhaps they do not retain articles that were simply merged, etc. if that is the case, that's infuriating, I wonder how many tens of thousands of man hours and how much knowledge has been vaporized in this way poof
- a3_nm 14y ago
  > I (John Kozubik / rsync.net) will donate USD 10,000 to wikipedia if they change their official stance to inclusionism The donations go to Wikimedia, the organization that runs the servers. It is purposedly distinct from the various communities of the various language editions of the various Wikimedia projects. I do not think it would be a good thing for the Wikimedia Foundation to start imposing views on the community like you would have them do.
  - khafra 13y ago
    Incentivizing the Wikipedia community by offering some extra cash to the organization that runs their servers is not necessarily the same thing as having that organization impose their views on the Wikipedia community.

I think you are setting the bar too high. Nothing is perfect, but Wikipedia is great. If you have some better idea how these things should be handled, then please explain.

rsync 14y ago

This is mildly off-topic, but since we're talking about the little hitlers that dominate wikipedia content, here goes... I (John Kozubik / rsync.net) will donate USD 10,000 to wikipedia if they change their official stance to inclusionism, and adopt a "all well formed articles belong" stance. Yes, most of what is in deletionpedia is garbage. Yes, it deserved to be deleted. But somewhere in there are thousands of articles that people spent hours on, in good faith, zapped away due to "notability". If it's well formed, it gets in.

bane 14y ago
I just got bit by this recently...there used to be an excellent article on frisson in WP. Full of great information and a nice collection of external resources. It was 2 or 3 pages long and was up for several years if I recall. It was probably one of the best summaries of the topic on the Internet at one time. It's gone, redirects to "cold chills" [1] which is not only incorrect, it's a far inferior article to begin with. Having given up on contributing or editing things in WP due to the rampant and frustrating deletionism I have no idea how to even begin the labyrinthine process of getting the old article returned. The only thing I can find of it is a history where sometime in 2007 it was marked for redirection...but I know that it worked at least through 2010 and into 2011 (my own comment history has a link to it back then). 1 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisson
- rsync 14y ago
  Frisson is not in deletionpedia - perhaps they do not retain articles that were simply merged, etc. Your frustration is shared by many, many people. Here's a well formed article on a software package: http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=EleBBS_(deleted_10_Jul_2008_at_04:15) http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=EleBBS_(d... that was deleted because some kids hadn't heard of RA before. There are thousands of these.
  - bane 14y ago
    > perhaps they do not retain articles that were simply merged, etc. if that is the case, that's infuriating, I wonder how many tens of thousands of man hours and how much knowledge has been vaporized in this way poof
a3_nm 14y ago
> I (John Kozubik / rsync.net) will donate USD 10,000 to wikipedia if they change their official stance to inclusionism The donations go to Wikimedia, the organization that runs the servers. It is purposedly distinct from the various communities of the various language editions of the various Wikimedia projects. I do not think it would be a good thing for the Wikimedia Foundation to start imposing views on the community like you would have them do.
- khafra 13y ago
  Incentivizing the Wikipedia community by offering some extra cash to the organization that runs their servers is not necessarily the same thing as having that organization impose their views on the Wikipedia community.