Talk:Blather
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Why is this not notable?
Let me start off saying that it's always frustrating when you don't find what you're looking for on Wikipedia. Sadly, amongst all the entries which are deleted for having no real relevance or notability, some worthy entries get deleted as well. Take this, for instance. I ran into the Blather site today for the first time, and it seemed like an interesting concept. I wanted to see a plain explanation of it, and thankfully, this page is here. It's a shame that Wikipedians are so discriminating in deciding what is 'notable'. Now, a construction worker makes an entry for himself? Okay, we don't need that. But if this site truly has 57,000 entries, I think it's ridiculous to say that it is not even somewhat notable, considering less popular websites have their own entries.--C.Logan 14:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I know this article is a mess, but why not merely a cleanup tag?
- yes, it really does have 59000+ articles (now), and nearly 16000 users[1] (not all of which are active, not all of which represent unique people)
- But, it does fail on some of the guidelines:
- non-partisan editors would probably be hard to find, though not impossible
- independant sources will be few, though not non-existent
- nonetheless, it's my (partisan; I'm a regular there) opinion that it is notable by virtue of it's being AFAIK a unique approach to collaborative content, and as such interesting re: development of the web.
- --User24 02:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- oh, btw an 'article' consists of multiple entries, there are nearly 500,000 entries[2], strengthening the case for it's notability, IMHO.
- --User24 02:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
