Surreptitiousness wrote: >> Why? You would be better advised to draft in userspace rather than >> just type straight into the box, but I don't understand why you think >> it doesn't still work in principle. >> > I can't do now what I did then. IP's cannot create new articles, and > you have to wait four days after creating an account to create a new > article. In fact "A user who edits through an account they have registered, may immediately create pages in any namespace (except the MediaWiki namespace, and limited to 8 per minute)" while "Autoconfirmed status is required to move pages, edit semi-protected pages, and upload files or upload a new version of an existing file". Seems there are misconceptions. (From [[Wikipedia:User access levels]]). > You just lost me. It doesn't still work either in principle or in > practise. >>> The point I was making was that we were not the high-ground; we >>> don't exist to publish academic research. >> No, we exist to regurgitate it. >> > Hmm. Not sure I agree, but I think we'd head into a primary versus > secondary sourcing argument. I'd certainly argue our mission would be > to contextualise and explain the research through recourse to > secondary sources, rather than to simply regurgitate it. I think > there's a viable argument that regurgitating it would fall foul of NOT > NEWS. >> >> The closure was a compromise, rather than a consensus emerging. >> ([[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 September 11#Deans of >> Lincoln]], for mavens.) While "Dean" and "Lincoln" were both deemed >> individually ambiguous, one side only was disambiguated. But not for >> a specific clash. So in a sense I lost the argument, it seems. But it >> could have been worse. >> >> > Hmm. Yes, interesting debate. That's one of the reasons I avoid CFD > these days. I think a major point that got missed is that no-one asked > the question of at what point would context not do the > disambiguating. Only then would there be a need for disambiguating. And only if the category page wasn't there to help out with an explanation. I really don't see that you can make as full an explanation of the category in the title as you could with a couple of paragraphs on the category page. It seems to me that the editable part of the page is provided for that.
Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
