2009/8/18 Cathy Edwards <[email protected]>: > I think I have a good idea why BLP are a hot topic of debate in this > area,
It's because they're special, because they can cause (and have caused) damage to people in a way that other articles can't. (And the same applies to material about living people in other articles.) Basically, we don't have the luxury of eventualism with biographical material about living people - it has to satisfy the standard rules (neutrality, verifiability, no original research) but we can't have a bad article and wait for it to be better - it has to be not-awful at any given time. So people get really harsh on reference quality, whether a given incident is noteworthy, etc. And that extends to even having an article at all - for many subjects, having a Wikipedia article can be a curse. > but why do you think fiction is contentious - because it's in > danger of unbalancing the encyclopedia? Often the sourcing is awful, primary research, original research, etc. I think it's frequently it's that the articles themselves aren't really good enough to convince, so people are unconvinced about the topic area in general. (We had similar problems with articles on schools a few years ago - "not notable, we don't need articles on every school," etc., but really I think it was that the articles were really not good or useful-looking. This is just in my subjective opinion.) Apart from that, some people just go "WHAT ON EARTH" at the idea of some topics being in the encyclopedia. - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
