[WikiEN-l] [[New Haven, Connecticut]]

Mon Mar 22 17:34:09 UTC 2004

Jimmy Wales wrote:

>Rick wrote:
>
>>My concern was not with some place that claims to have invented the
>>hamburger: it was just that the original poster was adding
>>off-the-cuff pizza places that, at least as far as was indicated in
>>the article, had no particular significance except possibly to the
>>poster.  To me, this is POV: "These are the places you should eat at,
>>not any others."
>>
>Possibly it's POV, but I don't read it exactly that way.  I'd say that
>the problem is not really POV here, but rather style and selectivity.
>We could frame it as a POV dispute, but I don't think that the person
>who wrote it really intended to slight anyone or advocate for
>anything.
>
Agreed, but for some POV is a too convenient bazooka for shooting down 
other people's contributions.

>In a short article on New Haven, Connecticut, it doesn't make
>stylistic sense to write about "On Route 4, there is a McDonald's
>restaurant which was founded in 1987.  This restaurant, interestingly
>enough, is part of a worldwide chain of very similar restaurants.  The
>menu includes a variety of American-style fast food, including
>primarily hamburgers, french fries, and soft drinks.  In recent years,
>the menu has been expanded to include more healthy alternatives, as
>well."
>
McDonald's is an interesting example.  They're ubiquitous.  If you've 
seen one you've seen them all.  My guess is that there probably is one 
in New Haven that is very near to these others.  It was not mentioned in 
the article, but unless there was something special or unique about that 
particular McDonald's -- why bother?

>And suppose someone wanted to write a really stupid and pointless
>article "Fast food in St. Petersburg, Florida", including the silly
>paragraph I wrote above.  And assume that the information could be
>confirmed.
>
I didn't see it as completely silly.

>I say: so what?  Let's let them do it.  It's not a major problem,
>since it's silly not many people will care to do it.  It won't be
>well-linked from anywhere on the site, so almost no one will ever see
>it.  I'm flexible on this point, because I think that it's hard to
>make blanket judgments, and that we would need a lot of case-by-case
>examples before we'd have enough experience to formulate a general
>rule.
>
I generally take this approach too.  Sometimes those who want to remove 
these things remind me too much of a Dr. Strangelove who would go to any 
extent to preserve bodily humors.

Ec

>