The Cunctator wrote:
One of the great flaws with the traditional approach to
history is its bias
towards the narrative of the hero--that the current world is best understood
as a single dramatic storyline with a few important protagonists and
antagonists. Perhaps you believe that is a complete and accurate
representation of the world, but I don't. I believe that the world, society,
etc. are best understood as products of the interaction of billions of
individuals. To gain a perfectly accurate picture of the world, we'd need to
know all of their stories. The closer we come to that the better.
Of course, one would want to start with those that are collectively accepted
as pivotal.
But we should not exclude knowledge in the pursuit of understanding.
So I take it you are proposing that we drop Wikipedia's long-held claim
that it is not a geneological database? Everyone who has ever lived
thus deserves to be included, as long as the facts are verifiable?
Every event that ever took place deserves to be included? Should I
upload a scan of my diploma (verifiable by contacting my university's
registrar)? How about articles on about 75 of my relatives who were
refugees from Turkey during the Greek-Turkish war (but were otherwise
not notable)--verifiable by Greek government immigration records. How
about a professor of mine who is currently on leave in Pennsylvania
(also verifiable)? My neighbor, who once ran unsuccessfuly for school
board (verifiable from the election records)? This just seems
ridiculous to me.
-Mark