Carcharoth wrote: >> Back in the early days of the odious origins of the jargon word >> "notability", back when it was a buzzword on VFD meaning "I haven't >> heard of it," people would raise this as one of the spurious arguments >> that made no sense on a moment's reflection. Like the one that too >> much text would overload the servers, so the okemon articls had to go. >> >> Please don't say this stuff without at least a moment's thought on >> whether it actually makes any sense. >> > > I do try. Hint: this was about summary style spin-off articles, and > where the line is drawn there. Not about notability in general. > Replace references to notability above with WP:SUMMARY, and it might > calm you down. > > I was going to disagree with your comment, too, though not quite on the same grounds as David Gerard. There can "aesthetic" grounds for objecting to global imbalances of coverage; but they really have no status. Disproportionate coverage can be a problem under NPOV. Otherwise I think it shades off into being a writing issue: where we favour concision as better for the reader.
Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
