Indeed. I can sign under this. Wait... I have... :) On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:03 AM, David Goodman <[email protected]> wrote:
> What harms the public view of Wikipedia is not articles on minor > subjects, or on matters i anyone will understand are of significance > only to fans. What really harms the perceived quality of Wikipedia is > promotional and inaccurate articles. almost everyone can realize that > the content of a reference work may include things they do not > themselves want--but they do expect it to be both honest and accurate. > > We could decide either for or against the detailed coverage of popular > culture, but what we cannot tolerate is the diversion of effort in > dealing with this. There is of course an obvious solution, which is to > silence everyone who does not agree with me, but that's not going to > fly. What we need is some way of not just forming a compromise but > having it persist--otherwise any solution will be back to the same > point in a few months. Arb com apparently does not think it is capable > of this, but I don't see how else it can be done--they should try a > little more boldness. Since they'll be criticised whatever they choose > to do or not to do, they might as well decide. > > -- > David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG > > - White Cat _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
