[WikiEN-l] GNAA Deleted!

Wed Nov 29 03:13:28 UTC 2006

Wikipedia isn't consistent.. We shouldn't let the fact the thousands
of things are done wrong be an excuse for doing things incorrectly.

We accept open submission so if we allow the existance of examples in
wikipedia to drive our standards we will, in effect, have no
standards. I'm sure that would make some people, people editing for
their own self-interests, happy but it would not be good.

Thankfully this point is already obvious to most...

On 11/28/06, George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/28/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This is a discussion about wikipedia, however, and not wikinews.
> > There are some subjects that an encyclopedia can not and should not
> > touch because there is simply no real research on the subjects yet.
>
>
>
> We are not applying that standard to any number of popular culture subjects,
> for which there exists no serious research on the particular aspect of
> popular culture.  There is research into popular culture as a whole, and
> there are for example literary and sociological journals dedicated to
> serious review of aspects of popular culture in many different media (one
> distant electronic aquaintence has a masters degree in the literary review
> of science fiction, to somewhat oversimplify).
>
> But the vast majority of popular culture items have not been subjected to
> independent research and are not documentable other than the particular item
> of culture itself.
>
> We have nearly *all* that documented, right now.
>
> Is GNAA less notable than (example pulled via short random walk)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Kanto_Gym_Leaders#Blaine ?
>
>
>
> --
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>