3 ms·

> It is unlikely to be notable enough to meet the criteria for being included in Wikipedia Why? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia [1], there is no need to keep the

by frik 13y ago

> It is unlikely to be notable enough to meet the criteria for being included in Wikipedia Why? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia [1], there is no need to keep the amount of pages low, storage is cheap and no one prints out Wikipedia on real paper. The "not notable enough" is a real threat to Wikipedia and the future of the project. The German Wikipedia already lost a lot of former authors (volunteers) because of admins gone crazy. They don't want anyone to edit "their" pages, and revert and ban almost every new edit/user. You can read about this serious situation on Heise.de [2]. Read also the 650+ comments of the related discussion [3]. The English version is still better in shape, but it moves in the same direction, unfortunately. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia [2] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Blutet-Wikipedia-aus-2123766.html http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Blutet-Wikipedia-aus-... ; Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FBlutet-Wikipedia-aus-2123766.html&act=url http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&pre... [3] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Blutet-Wikipedia-aus/forum-275514/list/ http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Blutet-Wikipedia-aus/... Edit: I am not against "notability requirement", with a better balance it's fine. Wikimedia Foundation should have a closer look at the German branch... maybe resetting all "admin" privileges would help?

hmsimha 13y ago
The idea is to prevent Wikipedia being turned into a tool for self-promotion. An example would be if I created a page for my name describing myself as a spelling consultant, then went to every article that mentioned a high-profile spelling blooper and added a line like 'without the services of a spelling consultant, such as [[hmsimha]]'.
grannyg00se 13y ago
It's not about storage or page count. It's about quality and relevant material. When I search for "band" (disambiguation) I wouldn't want to end up seeing a list of every high school band in the western hemisphere. It's just not important enough (to enough people) to include as part of an encyclopedia.
emddudley 13y ago
Various people have been claiming for years that the "notability" requirement is a threat to Wikipedia. Yet the project is still around and is still the go-to source for encyclopedic information.
- sp332 13y ago
  I go to Google for information. Sometimes it puts a Wikipedia page high in the results, and many times it doesn't.
NoahTheDuke 13y ago
Deletionism[0] is what's killing Wikipedia. Gwern's page, In Defense of Inclusionism[1] has a good summary of both sides, and argues all of the points I would make. [0]: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deletionism http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deletionism [1]: http://www.gwern.net/In%20Defense%20Of%20Inclusionism http://www.gwern.net/In%20Defense%20Of%20Inclusionism
lambda 13y ago
Yeah, it's a tough balance to keep. I think that notability requirements are important to avoid Wikipedia from becoming an unmaintainable, unverifiable pile of junk; but that there are some people who are way to quick to delete or revert, some people who are way too protective of "their" pages, and some admins who are a bit out of control. It's a tough balance to keep; I don't pretend to have a good answer for how to steer it in a better direction. I have been an off and on contributor to Wikipedia for years, but never enough to get involved in the politics or become an admin.

by frik 13y ago

hmsimha 13y ago

The idea is to prevent Wikipedia being turned into a tool for self-promotion. An example would be if I created a page for my name describing myself as a spelling consultant, then went to every article that mentioned a high-profile spelling blooper and added a line like 'without the services of a spelling consultant, such as [[hmsimha]]'.

grannyg00se 13y ago

It's not about storage or page count. It's about quality and relevant material. When I search for "band" (disambiguation) I wouldn't want to end up seeing a list of every high school band in the western hemisphere. It's just not important enough (to enough people) to include as part of an encyclopedia.

emddudley 13y ago

Various people have been claiming for years that the "notability" requirement is a threat to Wikipedia. Yet the project is still around and is still the go-to source for encyclopedic information.

sp332 13y ago
I go to Google for information. Sometimes it puts a Wikipedia page high in the results, and many times it doesn't.

NoahTheDuke 13y ago

Deletionism[0] is what's killing Wikipedia. Gwern's page, In Defense of Inclusionism[1] has a good summary of both sides, and argues all of the points I would make. [0]: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deletionism http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deletionism [1]: http://www.gwern.net/In%20Defense%20Of%20Inclusionism http://www.gwern.net/In%20Defense%20Of%20Inclusionism

lambda 13y ago

Yeah, it's a tough balance to keep. I think that notability requirements are important to avoid Wikipedia from becoming an unmaintainable, unverifiable pile of junk; but that there are some people who are way to quick to delete or revert, some people who are way too protective of "their" pages, and some admins who are a bit out of control. It's a tough balance to keep; I don't pretend to have a good answer for how to steer it in a better direction. I have been an off and on contributor to Wikipedia for years, but never enough to get involved in the politics or become an admin.