Skip to main content

Washington Post on Wikipedia (Webcomics Are One of the Examples)

Wikipedia's Non-notable policy is apparently notable. Today's Washington Post covers the deletion process, [tongue-in-cheek]inspired no doubt by Comixpedia's hard-hitting coverage all this week[/tongue-in-cheek].

What is wikipedia *supposed*

What is wikipedia *supposed* to be good at? With this draconian system of assuming "non-notability" until proven notable, what are they hoping to accomplish?

I could understand a perfect system where true spam and self-aggrandizement were purged, leaving stuff that somebody might find useful someday. But they throw the baby out with the bathwater by requiring a specific sort of proof of notability (non-trivial print citations which *are* verifiable online), leaving an encyclopedia that's not as good as a "real" one for academic matters, and half-missing for hip/web-savvy matters.

I'm serious, though, what is their goal in defaulting to delete over keep?

Hmmm - I tend to read it as

Hmmm - I tend to read it as the Post having its cake and eating it by being snotty to both sides. It's the little things like describing Wikipedia admins as computer geeks with too much time on their hands; or expressing surprise that Wiki has any standards at all.

I'm sure the Wiki guys will be as unhappy about those elements as a "deletee" would be about any suggestion of his being a "loser". The only major thing it misses is the fact that the admins/editors don't actually apply their own rules and standards evenly which makes the whole deletion/reinstatement issue a farce. Other than that, though, I think most of the complaints levelled against Wiki here (and, let's not forget, elsewhere) are in there.

Broken Voice Comics
Because comics are not just for kids

Broken Voice Comics
Because comics are not just for kids

It's not TOO snotty. Then

It's not TOO snotty. Then again, I sort of side with the Wiki on most matters. As far as the article itself is concerned, the one webcomic mentioned clearly SHOULD have been deleted - writing your own entry is a BIG no-no and is pretty much just shameless advertising.

Is too! :P

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

j/k

Well even putting aside the little discussion we had here this week - the Post article doesn't do a whole lot to dig into the issue. It just presents the Wikipedian policy and some quotes from them. The quotes from people concerned about their entries being deleted are (maybe not intentionally) tinged with "loser" and so don't do much to present any of the legitimate questions about this idea. Quoting some of the scholars and/or popular writers who have been prominent critics of Wikipedia would have made a fuller, better article and yes, one that sounded a little less snotty.

Having said all this I like and use Wikipedia. It's not perfect but it's pretty good. That doesn't mean that they might be doing somethings wrong and certainly my experience with them on the subject of webcomics has heightened my skepticism of what's written there which is not a bad way to read it. It's a good starting place but not where you want to finish on most subjects.

____

Xaviar Xerexes

Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Gnaw.

I run this place! Tip the piano player on the way out.

Meh. I found it to be a

Meh. I found it to be a reasonable overview for the layman, the article's target audience. Most people have no IDEA how Wikipedia works. Upon finding me on that site, the first question I always get asked is, "What, there's an article on you? Did you WRITE it?" NO, dildo, I'm not ALLOWED.

I'm all for enlightening the uninformed, even if said enlightening comes with snotty undertones.

Eh ok

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

Well agree to disagree I guess.

You're apparently covered on your entry - its starts off by saying "John Troutman is a notable webcomic artist..." :)

____

Xaviar Xerexes

Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Gnaw.

I run this place! Tip the piano player on the way out.

Totally. They'll never

Totally. They'll never delete me now. "But I AM notable! It SAYS so right there! Why would the entry lie?"

Wow - you scooped the

Wow - you scooped the Washington Post! In years to come, this affair will doubtless come to be known as the Wikigate scandal!

Broken Voice Comics
Because comics are not just for kids

Broken Voice Comics
Because comics are not just for kids

Actually

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

Actually it's a somewhat snotty article that takes an almost 100% pro-wikipedian view of the matter.

 

Xaviar Xerexes

Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Gnaw.

I run this place! Tip the piano player on the way out.