From: Michael Turley <michael.turley(a)gmail.com>
On 9/30/05, JAY JG <jayjg(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>From: Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa(a)gmail.com>
>
>Deletion policy states explicitly that if the only problem with an
article
>is that it's on a branch of a subject so
trivial that it doesn't merit
an
>article, it is *not* a candidate for
deletion, but should be merged to
a
>more comprehensive article.
>
>This isn't only policy, it's also a pretty sensible argument for
merging.
Sometimes information is so trivial that there is no merit in having it
in
any article. Remember, these are encyclopedia
articles, not
accumulations
of random facts.
Wouldn't you agree that whether something is too trivial or not is
best determined by the editors who review the merge target?
Surely those who best know Clarendon Hills, IL, are the ones best
suited to know whether a specific intersection in Clarendon Hills is
notable or not.
The counter-argument would be that people from Clarendon Hills are the least
likely to be able to objectively view whether something is important
information or trivia. It's easier to throw out the junk in someone else's
house than it is to throw out the junk in your own.
Jay.