On 11/6/03 2:14 PM, "Delirium" <delirium(a)rufus.d2g.com> wrote:
My
point about this is that there are plenty of people who have died in
noteworthy events. In fact, there are literally millions of them. I
strongly oppose one-sentence stub entires reading:
"Blah blah was an eagle scout who died in the Sep. 11 attacks."
"Blah blah was a plumber who died in the Holocaust."
"Blah blah was a shoe salesman who died in WW2."
"Blah blah was a computer programmer who died in the Vietnam war."
"Blah blah was a farmer who died in the Khmer Rouge genocide."
There is plenty of verifiable material to import literally millions of
such stubs. There's WW2 combat casualty information available from the
US government, for one.
If we have all these articles though, Wikipedia will be a joke.
Practically none of the sept. 11 entries are one liners. (The only ones
which do exist have had most of their content moved to the sep11 wiki
because the existing content was subjective--the continued existence of the
entries preserves the edit history.) Those should be considered with a grain
of salt (though the preservation of the edit history should be considered as
a factor). But there are a lot of straw man arguments being used here.
Noone is recommending importing millions of stubs.
Noone is recommending importing thousands of stubs.
Every september 11-related entry was created by hand and individually added.