User:Jeandjinni

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi. I'm a wikipedian that started simply writing articles about music I'm interested in, but then I got swept up into arguments with other editors and admins over Notability. But I'm here now, wasting time that I could be using for something more enjoyable.

I'm interested in Wikipedia's debates over Notability, particularly as it applies to music, but also as regards science and academic studies. My main concern is that articles about many notable subjects might be deleted due to bias in the collective knowledge of the wikipedia community (or the exclusion of knowledge from the margins). This problem can be observed in editorial debates about music and mainstream entertainment (and probably elsewhere, too, though I don't have the luxury of time to get involved in those debates - when push comes to shove, a reasonable person ends up arguing over and defending the articles and policies you're most knowledgable about, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that). On the micro level, I wouldn't propose for deletion an article about an obscure particle physicist or tuba player, as some degree of specialized knowledge in those areas is required before an informed judgment can be made. On the macro level, specialized/marginal knowledge enriches Wikipedia - in creating a more inclusive and comprehensive encyclopedia than has previously existed.

There also seems to be a problem in that the Wikipedia community has an apparent bias in favour of mainstream news and information sources (in judging the reliability of sources or nontriviality of coverage), of which too many, as any serious student of critical media studies will tell you, suffer from institutional bias themselves.