News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Wikipedia's Notability Requirements And The Slash by henrikschroder on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:43AM (#2216877)
Why would you spend an equal amount of time on each article, that's insane?!?

...and funnily enough the root of the problem, if Wikipedia could have a rating scale instead of the binary "accepted/deleted" then everyone could be happy. In such a system you could browse only reviewed, fact-checked, vetted, editted, adminned, wp:blergh articles, and have something that looks a lot like a real encyclopedia. Or you could browse at the EVERTHING setting, and read more about obscure pokemon references than you could ever want, or you could browse at any setting inbetween and get the level you want.

It's a false dichotomy that the choice is between either a well-edited encyclopedia or un-edited fandom crap. You can have both at the same time.

Re:Wikipedia's Notability Requirements And The Slash by prodigal_erik on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:37AM (#2217359)
Why should Wikipedia be at all involved with hosting content that isn't up to their standards? The EVERYTHING setting is the rest of the web.