| |||||||||||||
RIP Andre Hedrick (Register)RIP Andre Hedrick (Register)Posted Aug 3, 2012 18:38 UTC (Fri) by jimparis (subscriber, #38647)In reply to: RIP Andre Hedrick (Register) by jtc Parent article: RIP Andre Hedrick (Register)
Not strange at all. Very few people have a Wikipedia page devoted to them; even well-known celebrities like our own grumpy editor are missing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Corbet
Their guidelines for who is considered notable enough for an entry are here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28peop...
(Log in to post comments)
RIP Andre Hedrick (Register) Posted Aug 3, 2012 21:06 UTC (Fri) by khc (subscriber, #45209) [Link]
because he's there as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Corbet
Andre Hedrick: not in Wikipedia Posted Aug 5, 2012 19:59 UTC (Sun) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] Their guidelines for who is considered notable enough for an entry are here: ... In relevant part, to be worthy of an article, Andre not only has to be important and well known, but the subject of multiple existing works, each of which is written by someone who didn't know of him personally but read about him in other works. I suspect that guideline is widely ignored, like the ban on original research, to Wikipedia's benefit, but it does make it that much less likely for Andre to have an article.
Andre Hedrick: not in Wikipedia Posted Aug 6, 2012 0:49 UTC (Mon) by intgr (subscriber, #39733) [Link]
> I suspect that guideline is widely ignored
No guideline is "widely ignored". Sure, Wikipedia doesn't have "police" patrolling all changes and making sure that guidelines are uniformly enforced, but when someone raises an issue, the policies and guidelines certainly count.
Andre Hedrick: not in Wikipedia Posted Aug 6, 2012 3:12 UTC (Mon) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] when someone raises an issue, the policies and guidelines certainly count. That is consistent with policies and guidelines being widely ignored. If people frequently create articles that violate a guideline, and no one raises an issue, that is a guideline that is widely ignored. I see that happen a lot.
Andre Hedrick: not in Wikipedia Posted Aug 6, 2012 8:58 UTC (Mon) by intgr (subscriber, #39733) [Link]
Sorry about taking this comment thread off topic but...
> I see that happen a lot.
I see the other side a lot, too.
I think you have a selection bias -- by definition, you can only see the articles that *weren't* deleted. And the original research that *wasn't* contested. The fact that some of it is still out there doesn't mean that the guidelines are "widely ignored".
In reality, the deletion processes are full of new articles that get deleted due to lack of notability. I don't have the stats, but I'd bet more than half of new articles get properly reviewed. See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_dele... . Yes, that's 60-100 articles per day, every day.
|
|||||||||||||