Wikipedia:Avoid Parkinson's Bicycle Shed Effect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an essay. It is not a policy or guideline, it simply reflects some opinions of its authors. Please update the page as needed, or discuss it on the talk page. |
 |
This page in a nutshell: Don't get hung up on minor details. |
In his 1957 book Parkinson's Law, and Other Studies in Administration C. Northcote Parkinson describes a committee that met to discuss the construction of a new nuclear power plant. The agenda included three items: when to have tea, where to place the bicycle shed, and how to enforce safety of the plant. The tea issue was quickly dismissed. Nuclear safety was discussed for roughly an hour, being a difficult and embarrassing topic even for experts. The committee then spent no small number of days discussing the placement and the construction of the bicycle shed, since this was a topic which everybody felt comfortable dealing with.
Sadly, this effect can be noted on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and theoretically every Wikipedian is working to build an encyclopedia. However, many Wikipedians find their energies diverted by resolving disputes, or commenting on policy issues, or playing politics. These areas should be seen as the "bicycle shed", whilst the encyclopedia should be seen as "Nuclear safety".
In articles, this problem manifests itself in the way an article covers the topic. Sometimes articles fail to stick to the main article topic, but rather discuss minor aspects of the topic, such as usages in popular culture, or a brief list is contained for examples, which soon becomes the focus of the article. It is expected that articles are comprehensive, but they should also balance the information and give weight to areas of discussion in a neutral manner, focussing on presenting the description and application of the topic as the main bulk of the article.
