On 2/25/07, Sage Ross <sage.ross(a)yale.edu> wrote:
On 2/24/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/25/07, Sage Ross
<ragesoss+wikipedia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Standard practice has diverged considerably from
the official line,
and I agree with Phil that we need to amend WP:N in particular to be
more accommodating of content where the subject can at least be
verified to exist (e.g., webcomics, Battlestar Galactica episodes,
marginally notable real people).
I can confirm that 30 million chemical elements exist.
Huh?
Should have been compounds.
Anyway that would be pretty minor compared to the couple of hundred
million articles on stars.
Given that old enough census data is published
with can confirm rather
a lot of people exist as well. Confirming somthing exists doesn't mean
much.
I said "be more accommodating"; I don't mean to imply that existence
is sufficient. A measure of common sense
[[Wikipedia:There is no common sense]]
Common sense has no requirement to be logical or to be based on
evidence and thus has no place in a rational system.
Of course we live in a world where there are huge social pressures to
accept <s>bellyfeel</s> common sense
If you want a system that outsides have a hope of figuring out you
will set up system that includes as little common sense as possible.
when assessing an article's
reliability combined with a little looser official standards for
notability is the main thing (i.e., accepting that some topics that
people want to see in Wikipedia will have few good sources but keeping
rather than deleting them is still a plus to the overall quality of
Wikipedia).
[[WP:NOR]]
The problem I see there is failure to follow WP:WAF.
Forcing that
material into an out-of-universe perspective would bring out the best
from what is indeed rough going in its present form; it would bring
out the fact that conflicting interpretations exist and get much
closer to NPOV than it is now.
-Sage
The "is Rorschach gay?" and the "did Rorschach survive?" sections
were
written from an out of universe perspective. As was the
"interpretations by random people" section. [[Comedian (comics)]] if
you look at the The "Smile" section a couple of those are pretty
questionable.
--
geni