Only if I can write a corollary, "Any article 90 days old or more, with a single editor should be deleted". That would be a ground-level bar on "notability". And also an interesting exercise in cobweb control.
Will Johnson -----Original Message----- From: Luna <lunasan...@gmail.com> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Tue, Aug 18, 2009 3:29 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Request to Wikipedians for BBC Documentary On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 3:07 PM, <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote: > OK the other side of the argument is "Wikipedia is not paper". That > is, presumably, that we have a virtually unlimited amount of space in > which to describe whatever we want. > Indeed. Our size limitations are not physical, but logical. We're no longer limited by the number of paper pages one can bind together, nor by the number of bound volumes one can distribute, but rather by more abstract concepts of readability, usability, maintainability, and so on. I've been meaning for a while, now, to write a project-space essay encouraging a shift from "notability" to "maintainability" as a primary inclusion guideline. Lack of suitable sourcing makes maintenance difficult, because it's that much harder for us to be sure of accuracy and NPOV. If nothing else, the two ideas might complement each other well. -Luna _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
