> It feels to me that the arguments being made by those opposed to this
> content is that it's "out of scope for the article", and that putting
> this information in somehow violates our guidelines about undue
> weight, since nobody but a couple of academics cares about it and it's
> irrelevant.
>
> I find both quite troubling.  "Undue weight" doesn't mean "Remove all
> academics from popular culture articles because fans don't care, and
> fans outnumber academics 10,000:1".
>
> Attempts to define an article's scope as excluding academic content
> are also problematic.
>
> -Matt

Actually that argument is quite similar to those who felt inquiry into
the factual content of Sicko was outside the scope of the article.

Fred



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply via email to