|
Please do not edit this page, unless you are reverting vandalism or there is a serious issue that needs to immediately be solved. |
Summary
editI feel that notability is too arbitrarily and subjectively assessed for most articles. Too often, topics that do not need articles possess them, and things that do need them do not possess them. The existing guidelines are insufficient for a database as large and dynamic as Wikipedia.
Full Text
editWikipedia is an enormous database, and one of the most dynamic in the world. At the time of writing this, 3 103 579 English articles exist, and countless more are being created. However, a great many will also be deleted, the reasons for doing so cited as "notability" - or lack thereof. While there is a set of guidelines which aid in evaluating the notability of an article, this set is prone to subjective interpretation. "Significant coverage", "Reliable", and "Sources", for example, are open to personal bias and interpretation. Editors will assess the article in a way reflective of their interests and viewpoints. Take these two hypothetical scenarios:
- 1) Topic Preferences: Say two articles - of identical quality - concerning wholly different subjects exist. Imagine one concerns an annual sporting event - say, tennis - and the other discusses a new kind of lepton hypothesized to exist. Which would a tennis fan oppose the deletion of? What about from the viewpoint of a particle physicist?
- 2) Articles on Specific Media: Imagine two articles were to exist, each covering a novel. One discusses a science fiction novel, the other a medieval-themed one. Say both are identical in terms of citations, content accuracy, quality, and the like. Now imagine a user, who happens to be a science fiction fan, coming across each. Of the two, which are they more likely to defend upon learning that the article is up for deletion? Contrast that with a fan of the latter genre. And so on, for each genre and article, and editor.
I admit to bias as well; If I were to defend either an article on some new film, or an article concerning a newly discovered exoplanet, I would defend the latter. More generally, given the size and diversity of the Wikipedia community, one or more editors will oppose the deletion of the article, with just as many supporting it. Most or all would, if asked, be able to attempt to justify their viewpoint, with many referring to the aforementioned guidelines. The fact that the guidelines can be selectively interpreted as such is their fault; A set of criteria as widely used and as influential as they are need to be protected against the failings of their users. -RadicalOne---Contact Me 23:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)