Gregory's Server@cg @Sirablopp @monnier @gleick An organization such as Wikipedia has to have some standards, otherwise people will have pages for their spouses, even if a spouse did nothing other than get married to arguably deserve a page.
|
5 comments
@cg @Sirablopp @monnier @gleick I do not know the decision makers at Wikipedia. I did not know of your experience until you mentioned it to me. My experience with them is positive. They perform a useful function. There is always room for improvement. @RonSupportsYou @cg @monnier @gleick I assure you the topics and lists involved in the discussions I know about were not "pages for their spouses" and I'm sure neither were the ones Christoph mentioned. Here is one famous example: https://www.sciencealert.com/in-may-wikipedia-rejected-an-entry-on-a-physics-nobel-laureate-because-she-wasn-t-famous-enough But sure, just make up a fake argument nobody even brought up to feel good arguing against it, if that makes you happy. :) @Sirablopp @cg @monnier @gleick There is now a Wikipedia page for Donna Theo Strickland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donna_Strickland proving that Wikipedia is not perfect but it is getting better. @Sirablopp @RonSupportsYou @monnier @gleick |
@RonSupportsYou @Sirablopp @monnier @gleick
I know of indy bands who got asked to set up a WP page. So they did, added discography and all only to be wiped because they were not relevant. Without any chance for appeal.
Pages I started were deleted because they were "not good enough". No "please extend this", just gone. So I gave WP a heartfelt 🤬🖕 and stopped contributing.