I fully agree.
Recipes alone are just stubs that need to be enhance (history,
diffusion, etc.) like other stubs.
I really fear that interest the majority of wikipedian have on a subject
become the main factor to determine what is encyclopedic or not.
<irony>Sure, the recipes have really no interest while [[geek code]] is
really more important for the humanity!</irony>.
The definition of "encyclopedia" we can found in all French dictionary
is "compendium of all human knowledges". [[en:Encyclopedia]] don't speak
about that, so perhaps we are mistaken about Wikipedia goal? I'd really
appreciate if Jimbo could define what kind of encyclopedia is Wikipedia.
Aoineko
Sabine Cretella wrote:
I am cutting all the first part - and really this
is my consideration
after having read most of the messages.
But, as long as there is NO rule, it is just a
question of balance.
Regular edit wars you would say. Another very bold editor can come
and become the new gardian later. And possibly be an inclusive
gardian of dish articles, so many recipees will find their way back.
If it is a rule, then those restoring may be blocked for not
respecting a rule. Huge difference.
In effect, looking at the past 3 months, I think there are not much
new recipes, so I suppose any daring adding one is immediately
stopped in its activity. So, the result is just that a branch of
wikipedia was cut in its growth. We made a bonsai !
Imho wikipedia is much more than only an encyclopedia - it is THE
encyclopedia that not only gives definitions, but also helps to
understand other cultures. Food is part of a culture. Every
Nation/region has its food or cuisine par excellance and many habits
can be explained through this.
What would Italy be without Pizza? What would the Pizza-culture (yes,
in some countries it became a real culture) be without the mother of
all pizzas, the Pizza Margherita, named after a Queen, created in
Naples made of the Italian national colours to honour the queen (at
least this is what is known)? So this recipe IS culture and should be
trasmitted to many people. So why not create just the recipe in the
hope that someone who knows the whole story will add the rest? An only
recipe would be nothing else than a stub - stubs are to be completed.
Other Examples are:
Christmas pudding
Cheesecake
Stollen
Mustaccioli
Pannettone
Lebkuchen
Pasta al pomodoro (noodles with tomato sauce)
Spaghetti (originally from China as much as I remember)
Rice dishes
Sushi
Sauerkruaut
Wienerwürstel (the "Viennese sausages" that are called "Frankfurter"
in Vienna)
etc. etc. etc.
I don't feel that there's a need to discuss about this - it is clear
in itself as wikipedia is clear in itself. Stubs were made for first
steps on a certain theme - cuisine is a theme, recipes are subtitles
of "French cuisine, Mediterranean cuisine, German cuisine, British
cuisine, American cuisine".
This is the huge difference of Wikipedia to ordinary encyclopedias -
you/we have the possibility to give all this information - people who
are not interested in it simply don't read it, but people who are
interested will prefer Wikipedia 1000 and more times to a paperwork
where they then need to buy other books and kitchen encyclopedias (the
exist) in order to have complete overviews.
Why destroy one of the huge powers of Wikipedia? The power of being
different, the power of digging deeper and deeper.
My 2 cts ;-)
Ciao, Sabine
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org