|
|
1234
... 6
|
|
In reply to this post by Frederick Noronha [फ़रेदरिक नोरोनया] فريدريك نورونيا
2007/1/7, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]>:
> Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
> cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
> prominent or noteworthy?
No, but it does work the other way around: we need some kind of indication
that it is prominent or noteworthy, and cyberspace-presence is one of the
easier ways to get such an indication.
See as one example:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
> censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
> participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.
When I Google for:
Vikalp "films for freedom"
which would be a quite specific search, I still get 500+ hits. If it were
notable,
There must be some way out. Your suggestions would be welcome. FN
>
Well, in the ideal case, the article itself would be enough to judge
notability, and a Google search would only be necessary if there were doubts
about the actual correctness of the notability claims.
--
Andre Engels, [hidden email]
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
Maybe you're using the wrong search-term. I tried "Vikalp + film" on
Google, and got over 800. Results 1 - 10 of about 806 for Vikalp film.
(0.16 seconds)
Vikalp ("alternative") is a commonly understandable Indian term, and
hence this is the shortened name most often used. "Films for freedom"
is not the often-used term. I added the "film", just to make sure that
it doesn't draw some other unrelated Vikalps in the net.
On 07/01/07, Andre Engels < [hidden email]> wrote:
> 2007/1/7, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]>:
> When I Google for:
>
> Vikalp "films for freedom"
>
> which would be a quite specific search, I still get 500+ hits. If it were
> notable,
The point I am trying to make is that mere cyber presence doesn't
imply prominence, and vice versa. In the Third World (a term I prefer
to use), there are still many who prefer to focus on the real world
rather than on cyberspace.
Also mere cyber presence would not necessarily mean prominence. For
instance "Results 1 - 10 of about 136,000 for "Frederick Noronha"."
Because my name draws 136,000 hits on Google, doesn't mean that I'm
notable or popular... it just probably means that I've been active in
cyberspace (for the past 12 years or so... 'early' by Indian standards
:-)).
I'm not contesting your point... just saying that there needs to be
some discerning criteria. Thanks for your patience! FN
--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.comhttp://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
2007/1/7, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]>:
I'm not contesting your point... just saying that there needs to be
> some discerning criteria. Thanks for your patience! FN
>
I don't think there can be any other criterium than common sense. The types
of subjects that come up on Wikipedia is too diverse to set a single rule
for all of them.
Google can be useful, but a single cut-off value is not. For some subjects a
single hit that proves existence is enough, for others 1000 hits are still a
very low number. For example, I once saved [[William Gott]] based on a
single Google hit of about 30 that existed then (4000 now) - he did indeed
exist, and that was enough. On the other hand, getting 800 hits for a
web-based program was a 'strong delete' vote.
Maybe even more important than the number of Google hits, is their nature.
Suppose you have a current painter. If they have many Google hits, but many
consisting of places where it seems the painter could have submitted the
material himself, it doesn't count for much. If you have the same number,
but with a number of those links being galleries in various countries
announcing their expositions, it is a clear reason for keeping the article.
--
Andre Engels, [hidden email]
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
You're right. But much of Asia, Africa and Latin America is simply
invisible in cyberspace! So, are we building alternatives, or just
carrying on the old (unjust) "information and communication order". FN
On 07/01/07, Andre Engels < [hidden email]> wrote:
> 2007/1/7, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]>:
>
> I'm not contesting your point... just saying that there needs to be
> > some discerning criteria. Thanks for your patience! FN
> >
>
> I don't think there can be any other criterium than common sense. The types
> of subjects that come up on Wikipedia is too diverse to set a single rule
> for all of them.
>
> Google can be useful, but a single cut-off value is not. For some subjects a
> single hit that proves existence is enough, for others 1000 hits are still a
> very low number. For example, I once saved [[William Gott]] based on a
> single Google hit of about 30 that existed then (4000 now) - he did indeed
> exist, and that was enough. On the other hand, getting 800 hits for a
> web-based program was a 'strong delete' vote.
>
> Maybe even more important than the number of Google hits, is their nature.
> Suppose you have a current painter. If they have many Google hits, but many
> consisting of places where it seems the painter could have submitted the
> material himself, it doesn't count for much. If you have the same number,
> but with a number of those links being galleries in various countries
> announcing their expositions, it is a clear reason for keeping the article.
>
> --
> Andre Engels, [hidden email]
> ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l>
--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.comhttp://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
Interesting what you write, Bogdan. The links you came up with from
the Google timeline are also nice. But there is still a problem here.
I did a search for my own name. And compared the hits with what I
know.... It depends a lot to *which* newspapers get archived.
There is probably a strong case for finding other criteria of
'prominence' for societies (from the "South" or "developing world")
which may still be largely oral societies... forget about being
written ... not to speak of being digitised!
Where, for instance, would unrecorded and non-digitised traditional
knowledge fit into the Wikipedia? We're having the same problem with
patents here in India. Unless something is recorded (and
understandable as such to someone in a Western patents office), is it
not being considered as "prior knowledge". So the Indian solution is
to translate tonnes of traditional knowledge into English, and
digitise it! But obviously, the Wikipedia can't follow similar
criteria, for obvious reasons. FN
On 07/01/07, Bogdan Giusca < [hidden email]> wrote:
--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.comhttp://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Frederick Noronha [फ़रेदरिक नोरोनया] فريدريك نورونيا
Hi there,
Personally, I prefer to prod articles with notability asserted but no way
to verify that. In these "cases", I also check if the Wikipedia in the
language related to the article (in this case, hi.wikipedia.org) has an
entry about this topic.
I haven't, but maybe I should suggest creating an article in the user's
native language. In the same way as a Google test fails, an AFD may also
fail due the inability of users to check the claims.
Oh, once I even posted a note at WikiProject India to get some feedback
about Mair Rajputs :-)
Roberto / ReyBrujo
On 1/7/07, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]> wrote:
--
Roberto Alfonso [hidden email]
Rhynox, the Mighty Rockfriend, Thane of the Hill Dwarves and Mythical
Blacksmith, legend, male dwarf genesis.tekno.chalmers.se:3011
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
Hi all, Thank you all for your patience. I'm not being difficult here,
but just feel I need to explain how things work in this part of the
globe.... not always logically!
Okay, I'm as Indian as they come... my unusual name is because I'm
from Goa, the former Portuguese colony.
My wager is that en.wikipedia.org would be far, far more
representative of India than, say hi.wikipedia.org Sad but true. And
there are reasons for that.
Have you seen the way Indians interact with themselves? If meeting
outside the North Indian belt, there's a good chance they (we?) would
be taking to each other in English. There are just so much diversity
here, that like it or not, English often serves as a link language.
Added to this, many of the Wikipedia contributors would be
college/university-educated types, often more comfortable to express
ideas in English than, say, in an Indian language. I've made hundreds
of edits in English
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fredericknoronha]
but am litterally struggling to get a Konkani Wikipedia going (Konkani
is India's smallest "national" languages, with between 1.5 to 5
million speakers, depending whose estimates one accepts).
On 08/01/07, Roberto Alfonso < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Personally, I prefer to prod articles with notability asserted but no way
> to verify that. In these "cases", I also check if the Wikipedia in the
> language related to the article (in this case, hi.wikipedia.org) has an
> entry about this topic.
>
> I haven't, but maybe I should suggest creating an article in the user's
> native language. In the same way as a Google test fails, an AFD may also
> fail due the inability of users to check the claims.
>
> Oh, once I even posted a note at WikiProject India to get some feedback
> about Mair Rajputs :-)
>
> Roberto / ReyBrujo
>
> On 1/7/07, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi all, I'm from India, a contributor to the Wikipedia. In recent
> > times, the 'mortality' of new Wikipedia entries seems to be higher
> > than usual. While one can understand the need for abundant caution,
> > it's also important to allow for a diversity of concerns and issues in
> > this space.
> >
> > Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
> > cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
> > prominent or noteworthy? See as one example:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
> > censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
> > participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.
> >
> > There must be some way out. Your suggestions would be welcome. FN
> > --
> > FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> > http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com> > http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
While working on articles about Singaporean movies, I've encountered a
similar problem: difficulty finding references due to systemic bias.
Some seem to have the impression that Singaporean = non-notable. I've
seen articles on many Singaporean topics, which no Singaporean would
contest the notability of, get nominated for deletion, under the claim
of non-notability.
That Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias is not surprising.
On 1/8/07, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi all, Thank you all for your patience. I'm not being difficult here,
> but just feel I need to explain how things work in this part of the
> globe.... not always logically!
>
> Okay, I'm as Indian as they come... my unusual name is because I'm
> from Goa, the former Portuguese colony.
>
> My wager is that en.wikipedia.org would be far, far more
> representative of India than, say hi.wikipedia.org Sad but true. And
> there are reasons for that.
>
> Have you seen the way Indians interact with themselves? If meeting
> outside the North Indian belt, there's a good chance they (we?) would
> be taking to each other in English. There are just so much diversity
> here, that like it or not, English often serves as a link language.
>
> Added to this, many of the Wikipedia contributors would be
> college/university-educated types, often more comfortable to express
> ideas in English than, say, in an Indian language. I've made hundreds
> of edits in English
> [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fredericknoronha]
> but am litterally struggling to get a Konkani Wikipedia going (Konkani
> is India's smallest "national" languages, with between 1.5 to 5
> million speakers, depending whose estimates one accepts).
>
> On 08/01/07, Roberto Alfonso < [hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Personally, I prefer to prod articles with notability asserted but no way
> > to verify that. In these "cases", I also check if the Wikipedia in the
> > language related to the article (in this case, hi.wikipedia.org) has an
> > entry about this topic.
> >
> > I haven't, but maybe I should suggest creating an article in the user's
> > native language. In the same way as a Google test fails, an AFD may also
> > fail due the inability of users to check the claims.
> >
> > Oh, once I even posted a note at WikiProject India to get some feedback
> > about Mair Rajputs :-)
> >
> > Roberto / ReyBrujo
> >
> > On 1/7/07, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Hi all, I'm from India, a contributor to the Wikipedia. In recent
> > > times, the 'mortality' of new Wikipedia entries seems to be higher
> > > than usual. While one can understand the need for abundant caution,
> > > it's also important to allow for a diversity of concerns and issues in
> > > this space.
> > >
> > > Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
> > > cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
> > > prominent or noteworthy? See as one example:
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
> > > censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
> > > participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.
> > >
> > > There must be some way out. Your suggestions would be welcome. FN
> > > --
> > > FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> > > http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com> > > http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php>
> --
> FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l>
--
Written with passion,
J.L.W.S. The Special One
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
I agree... What would be worse is if the "systemic bias" follows the
traditional fault lines, which we have been so concerned about for so
long. After all, the New Media and its bottoms-up approach was meant
to make things "different". That's why we have so much faith in it,
and would like to invest our volunteer efforts here. Maybe, it is time
we recognised this problem and began to deal with it: how do
initiatives like the Wikipedia deal with non-English, non-visible,
largely non-digitised and oral societies (which have wealth of their
own, but not in a traditionally 'recognisable' sense)? To push a topic
to Wikia just because *we* can't recognise it's worth is unfair to the
topic. We can't also enter the vicious cycle of argument believing
that because-it-isn't-there-it-isn't-prominent (how does it become
'prominent' in the first place, if it is being rejected on these
grounds)?
Yet, there must be *some* way out. Am optimistic... FN
On 08/01/07, J.L.W.S. The Special One < [hidden email]> wrote:
> While working on articles about Singaporean movies, I've encountered a
> similar problem: difficulty finding references due to systemic bias.
>
> Some seem to have the impression that Singaporean = non-notable. I've
> seen articles on many Singaporean topics, which no Singaporean would
> contest the notability of, get nominated for deletion, under the claim
> of non-notability.
>
> That Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias is not surprising.
--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
In reply to this post by J.L.W.S. The Special One
On 08/01/07, J.L.W.S. The Special One < [hidden email]> wrote:
> While working on articles about Singaporean movies, I've encountered a
> similar problem: difficulty finding references due to systemic bias.
> Some seem to have the impression that Singaporean = non-notable. I've
> seen articles on many Singaporean topics, which no Singaporean would
> contest the notability of, get nominated for deletion, under the claim
> of non-notability.
> That Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias is not surprising.
This may be worth politely noting on WT:AFD.
- d.
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
David Gerard wrote:
>On 08/01/07, J.L.W.S. The Special One < [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>While working on articles about Singaporean movies, I've encountered a
>>similar problem: difficulty finding references due to systemic bias.
>>Some seem to have the impression that Singaporean = non-notable. I've
>>seen articles on many Singaporean topics, which no Singaporean would
>>contest the notability of, get nominated for deletion, under the claim
>>of non-notability.
>>That Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias is not surprising.
>>
>>
>
>
>This may be worth politely noting on WT:AFD.
>
>
>
This is unfortunately not just a problem on the English wikipedia but in
the Dutch one as well. and I would think in many other big language
editions. As soon as something isn't covered by google people
unfortunately assume it isn't notable :( .
Waerth
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
2007/1/8, Walter van Kalken < [hidden email]>:
> This is unfortunately not just a problem on the English wikipedia but in
> the Dutch one as well. and I would think in many other big language
> editions. As soon as something isn't covered by google people
> unfortunately assume it isn't notable :( .
>
Then again, where's the alternative? I can remember you making a big case
of this on the Dutch Wikipedia once. Tracking things down, in all
probability you had been reverting the removal of vandalism on the basis of
it.
--
Andre Engels, [hidden email]
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
Maybe we should use some discernment, instead of the mechanical rule
of 'number of links' on Google or where-ever. In journalism, it is
always easy to make out what is a 'plug' for someone and what is a
genuine news-item. Guess Wikipedia could depend on local teams to also
offer some cross-checking. FN
On 08/01/07, Andre Engels < [hidden email]> wrote:
> 2007/1/8, Walter van Kalken < [hidden email]>:
>
> > This is unfortunately not just a problem on the English wikipedia but in
> > the Dutch one as well. and I would think in many other big language
> > editions. As soon as something isn't covered by google people
> > unfortunately assume it isn't notable :( .
> >
>
> Then again, where's the alternative? I can remember you making a big case
> of this on the Dutch Wikipedia once. Tracking things down, in all
> probability you had been reverting the removal of vandalism on the basis of
> it.
>
> --
> Andre Engels, [hidden email]
> ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.comhttp://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
Maybe this is a rookie opinion, but I think that the AFD process tends to
attract people who are focused on keeping wikipedia "uncluttered" and
"relevant". They're always going to "err on the side of delete" and that's
that. You can present anything to the people at AFD, but its a systemic
habit. Those aren't just going to undo because of one person's polite
suggestion.
While I happen to think deletionists could be restrained greatly without
loss to Wikipedia (since the articles they're deleting are hardly well
connected and widely viewed), I'm just one opinion. Over the years I've
noticed a kind of institutional insecurity grow in Wikipedia, over fears our
pedia is being perceived as full of unverified internet rabble.
-S
On 1/8/07, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Maybe we should use some discernment, instead of the mechanical rule
> of 'number of links' on Google or where-ever. In journalism, it is
> always easy to make out what is a 'plug' for someone and what is a
> genuine news-item. Guess Wikipedia could depend on local teams to also
> offer some cross-checking. FN
>
> On 08/01/07, Andre Engels < [hidden email]> wrote:
> > 2007/1/8, Walter van Kalken < [hidden email]>:
> >
> > > This is unfortunately not just a problem on the English wikipedia but
> in
> > > the Dutch one as well. and I would think in many other big language
> > > editions. As soon as something isn't covered by google people
> > > unfortunately assume it isn't notable :( .
> > >
> >
> > Then again, where's the alternative? I can remember you making a big
> case
> > of this on the Dutch Wikipedia once. Tracking things down, in all
> > probability you had been reverting the removal of vandalism on the basis
> of
> > it.
> >
> > --
> > Andre Engels, [hidden email]
> > ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
>
> --
> FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com> http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l>
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Frederick Noronha [फ़रेदरिक नोरोनया] فريدريك نورونيا
2007/1/8, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]>:
>
> Maybe we should use some discernment, instead of the mechanical rule
> of 'number of links' on Google or where-ever. In journalism, it is
> always easy to make out what is a 'plug' for someone and what is a
> genuine news-item. Guess Wikipedia could depend on local teams to also
> offer some cross-checking. FN
>
That's definitely a possibility. As said before, I think that mechanically
counting the number of links on Google is no good at all. The very least one
should do, is set the limits differently depending on the subject - higher
for western subjects, computer-related subjects and pop culture, lower for
third world subjects or subjects that had their main popularity over 10
years ago.
But even better would be to check not the number but the nature of the links
found. Or something similar to your proposal: If the Google search does not
give a clear answer immediately, have a list of experts where one or a few
can be chosen who should be able to render judgement.
--
Andre Engels, [hidden email]
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
Hmmm... some interesting issues being raised below. Just for argument
sake: what happens if an "un-notable" entry makes it to Wikipedia?
Would it be a grave error? Notability, after all, is mostly related to
context. Would Shakespeare have been as "noted" a writer, if he had to
be born in, say, Upper Egypt?
I think the problem lies elsewhere. The trouble is: people or
institutions being packaged to be what they are not. Or bloated claims
about institutions or organisations or individuals.
Rather than just delete entries for being un-notable, perhaps we need
to find ways to ensure that what's written is both accurate and
tallies with the reality. --FN
On 08/01/07, Steve < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Maybe this is a rookie opinion, but I think that the AFD process tends to
> attract people who are focused on keeping wikipedia "uncluttered" and
> "relevant". They're always going to "err on the side of delete" and that's
> that. You can present anything to the people at AFD, but its a systemic
> habit. Those aren't just going to undo because of one person's polite
> suggestion.
>
> While I happen to think deletionists could be restrained greatly without
> loss to Wikipedia (since the articles they're deleting are hardly well
> connected and widely viewed), I'm just one opinion. Over the years I've
> noticed a kind of institutional insecurity grow in Wikipedia, over fears our
> pedia is being perceived as full of unverified internet rabble.
>
> -S
--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.comhttp://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
|
|
Heresy!
On 1/8/07, Frederick Noronha < [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hmmm... some interesting issues being raised below. Just for argument
> sake: what happens if an "un-notable" entry makes it to Wikipedia?
> Would it be a grave error? Notability, after all, is mostly related to
> context. Would Shakespeare have been as "noted" a writer, if he had to
> be born in, say, Upper Egypt?
>
> I think the problem lies elsewhere. The trouble is: people or
> institutions being packaged to be what they are not. Or bloated claims
> about institutions or organisations or individuals.
>
> Rather than just delete entries for being un-notable, perhaps we need
> to find ways to ensure that what's written is both accurate and
> tallies with the reality. --FN
>
> On 08/01/07, Steve < [hidden email]> wrote:
> > Maybe this is a rookie opinion, but I think that the AFD process tends
> to
> > attract people who are focused on keeping wikipedia "uncluttered" and
> > "relevant". They're always going to "err on the side of delete" and
> that's
> > that. You can present anything to the people at AFD, but its a systemic
> > habit. Those aren't just going to undo because of one person's polite
> > suggestion.
> >
> > While I happen to think deletionists could be restrained greatly without
> > loss to Wikipedia (since the articles they're deleting are hardly well
> > connected and widely viewed), I'm just one opinion. Over the years I've
> > noticed a kind of institutional insecurity grow in Wikipedia, over fears
> our
> > pedia is being perceived as full of unverified internet rabble.
> >
> > -S
> --
> FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> http://fn.goa-india.org http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com> http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l>
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
|
1234
... 6
|
Locked
![Frederick Noronha [फ़रेदरिक नोरोनया] فريدريك نورونيا](/images/avatar100.png "Frederick Noronha [फ़रेदरिक नोरोनया] فريدريك نورونيا"){kind=avatar}
