| |||||||||||||
Andre Hedrick: not in WikipediaAndre Hedrick: not in WikipediaPosted Aug 6, 2012 0:49 UTC (Mon) by intgr (subscriber, #39733)In reply to: Andre Hedrick: not in Wikipedia by giraffedata Parent article: RIP Andre Hedrick (Register)
> 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.
(Log in to post comments)
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.
|
|||||||||||||