User:Valters/Notability Disability

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] The Notability Disability

This essay is in fact-and-thought gathering phase. Please visit back in few weeks, maybe I will have something worth for you to ponder.

Wikipedia is losing knowledge, because it was the only site that had it. No other site allowed people to share the information they had, so the information flows to Wikipedia naturally. But then Wikipedia turns on the information, and starts purging it agressively. In what name?

Will we see a day when you will need to petition Wikipedia to create a new article, which then will need to go through review by committee, approval process, planning and outlining before anything but a stub entry is created. Where does it leave the person who was willing to contribute?

Wikipedia was a go-to place for obscure information.

User:Thue has proposal for shutting down Wikipedia. Well, any proposal that makes it harder for somebody to edit Wikipedia is going to degenerate into closed elitist society. It is apparent from the current outbursts of elitism from power-tripping Wikipedia Editors or Administrators.

The source of the purge may be Wikipedia:Pushing_to_1.0, but for whom? For whom are we preparing this sanitized, cut and dried, skeleton of once-living creature?

It used to be that Wikipedia had insider information, somewhat well researched, even if not verifiable. But who does go verifying everything? If it's a big deal, then sure, I could - but if there is no leads (becase any leads were deemed "unencyclopedic"), then I am left dead in the water.

I think we should continue with this guideline reading, "well known" rather than "well known to an online subculture." "Well known to an online subculture" is not a verifiable standard for "notability." -- Dragonfiend 16:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC) notability

So Wikipedia is turning into mainstream site for mainstream shite? Only popular topics will be ever available, but that is just writing yourself to oblivion grave.

In light of even Jimbo working to shorten articles to point of uselessness I am thinking there is nothing we can do. It's strange - the article my have been written by daughter of the researcher in question (probably the best expert in the world on the subject matter), that's still not good enough for Wikipedia.