Is there a technical reason why 'breakout' articles can't be article
subpages? In that way they wouldn't be articles in themselves, but
subsets of other articles, and you could judge the notability of an
article in whole without judging its individual components separately.
Maybe a worry that a proliferation of article subpages would make
things unmanageable?
On Dec 21, 2007 4:44 PM, Matthew Brown <morven(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 21, 2007 1:07 PM, David Gerard
<dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That sounds like an excellent argument for
trashing the "notability"
guideline, which has always been deeply problematic, particularly for
its subjectivity.
Wholly agreed.
Additionally, most such articles exist as break-outs from an article
that nobody is arguing should be deleted. Breaking out detail that
would make the primary article unwieldy is a long accepted Wikipedia
practise.
Remember that the Wikipedia jargon word
"notability" originated as a
back-formation from "non-notable," which was Votes For Deletion jargon
for "I don't like it." And that's about all it still is.
Notability is the attempt to provide solid rules for deletion because
of the criticism that 'non-notable' is subjective. However,
consistent subjectivity is still subjective, no matter how consistent
it is.
Notability is also not well derived from core policy, IMO.
-Matt
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l