[WikiEN-l] We need a pedia split

Sat May 6 03:09:56 UTC 2006

On 5/5/06, Cheney Shill <halliburton_shill at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I definitely agree with this, but Phil is right about the coverage (although not about the application of undue weight which is for NPOV determination).  It seems like all this pop-culture stuff (which also includes the likes of the Britneys of the world and wrestling entertainment) could be dumped, umm, I mean reorganized, into another wiki project, such as Mediapedia, Wikipop, or WikiStuffNobodyWillCareAbout100YearsFromNow.  I think it would be better, for both groups to have admins dealing with the type of content they are dedicated to and interested in.  I see a lot of inactive admins and it would be interesting to see how many have decided to take an indefinite leave of absence because they spend 90% of their time dealing with content and user disputes involving articles they have no interest in.~~~~Pro-Lick

Why don't we wait 100 years before we make that determination? I mean,
we already do that for things from the 1800s or whatever, and it seems
unfair to impose a higher standard on current things. I am no
historian, but I imagine there are many, many things that have been
derided as crap or pop culture or irrelevant by the generation which
produced them, but later generations gleaned greater value from them
than did their creators. (Off-hand, I'm thinking of Japanese romantic
tales and novels in the Heian era, and fiction in European
monasteries, and penny dreadfuls. No doubt others can adduce many
other examples).
To wax less prolix, we aren't in a very good position to determine
what the future will find notable or not; all we can hope to do is
filter out a decent portion of the crap.

~maru