
Why the lucky stiff Wikipedia entry page to be deleted - raju
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_the_lucky_stiff
======
tptacek
No it's not.

Anybody in the world can add an AfD tag to an article and put it up for
deletion. Go ahead, try it: you can get DHH or Paul Graham listed right now.
But without a clear consensus to delete, the article isn't going anywhere.
Moreover, once the article survives an AfD, it is harder to delete in the
future.

This article is running 2-1 keep. I've never seen an AfD succeed with half
that opposition. All you can do at this point is piss the WP hobbyists off,
have the delete discussion devolve into an argument about "voting versus
debating", and make the discussion that much harder for the deleting admin to
assess.

Sorry, I know it's a slow news day, but this doesn't count.

~~~
icey
Thanks for the heads up on how this works. Not knowing wikipedia's process at
all, I would have thought that why's entry was about to be deleted as well.

Now we know that it's not as big a deal as it seems.

~~~
thaumaturgy
| Not knowing wikipedia's process at all, I would have thought that why's
entry was about to be deleted as well.

From the big note at the top of the page:

"This article is being considered for deletion ... Please share your thoughts
on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page."

There's nothing there to suggest that it's about to be deleted, and getting
more information about the process of article deletion is as easy as following
the links posted in the note at the top of the page. Wikipedia tries to be
fairly transparent about this sort of thing.

Also, note that this article was considered for deletion about a year and a
half ago, and the overall consensus was to keep it. It's probably gonna be
sticking around, although it needs some heavy cleaning up.

~~~
icey
"This article is being considered for deletion" seems like a strong indicator
that it might be deleted to me.

------
ovi256
He looks a bit like Jack Black, does he not?

His achievements are certainly impressive. I would be content to draw half as
well and be half as imaginative. Great product and tool creator and has a
band? Come on, do not crush us.

Thanks and keep up the good work!

------
raju
tptacek - Thank you for letting me know how Wikipedia works. I did not realize
that, and next time I will be sure to investigate into the issue further prior
to posting it.

I saw this link pop-up on my feed, and knowing _why and his contribution to
the ruby community, I felt this to be relevant. In hindsight, it now seems
like it wasn't that relevant.

To fellow hackers out there, my intention was not to post for the sake of
posting. I appreciate the HN community, and find myself frowning occasionally
when certain articles get upvoted. I certainly did not intend to pollute the
quality of articles that make it HN.

To all, my sincere apologies.

~~~
tptacek
You're not supposed to worry about whether your posts are good. That's why we
have the little arrow thingies we click on to score the articles. Stop
worrying and keep posting. =)

~~~
hugh
Actually you are supposed to worry about whether your posts are good... the
little arrows just give you feedback about whether they are or not, and
discourage you from posting things which aren't.

------
hugh
I'm unclear on why people seem to care so much that there should be a
wikipedia article on this annoyingly-named guy who is (at best) borderline
notable.

Is it because they've read some of his work and now feel a loyalty towards
him?

Or is it because the revelation that "the third most important person in the
Ruby community" isn't really all that important when viewed from outside said
"community" might give them an unwanted perspective on their own sense of
their own importance?

~~~
sofal
There are a lot of people that really aren't all that important when viewed
from outside the communities in which they really are important.

I'm sorry that you're annoyed by his alias, and that you feel that Ruby users
are self-important fools. I hope you can either get past those feelings or
come up with a better argument.

~~~
tptacek
Well, there actually is a WP guideline about this phenomenon: WP:LOCALFAME.
The long/short of it is: you're notable if a reliable source (not a blog) has
written about you. It's pretty much exactly that simple.

~~~
hugh
That sounds like a pretty loose criterion. I know plenty of non-notable people
who have had, say, articles written about them in the newspaper.

In any case, looking at the sources at the bottom of this page, this guy
doesn't even seem to satisfy this criterion.

~~~
tptacek
Yes. It is loose. It does get annoying. I've put many articles up for deletion
and failed because of scraps of evidence --- press releases reprinted in news
feeds, for instance.

So, if you want to take your issue with _why and litigate it in the AfD, go
ahead and do it. You'll lose, though.

------
bprater
If you don't know who the _stiff_ is, you probably run around well outside
Ruby circles. Hit up hackety.org and spend enough time to go through some of
his archives.

_stiff_ is a uniquely creative guy. Instead of copying-and-pasting source
code, you'll often find him sketching it out on paper with doodles.

He's a tough guy to define. Maybe it's best not to. Maybe that's why we don't
know his real name. He is a hero though to many of us.

------
henning
This is what is brilliant about Wikipedia. Cartoon characters from children's
shows are extensively detailed (e.g.,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pok%C3%A9mon> ), but pages about semi-
notable figures in the web development community are debated for deletion.

Jigglypuff is more notable than why the lucky stiff? Yeah, OK, if you're a
comic book guy nerd.

~~~
hugh
Millions of people all over the world have heard of Jigglypuff. I personally
have bashed jigglypuff's oversized head in with a large mallet many times in
Super Smash Bros. Jigglypuff is no doubt an important cultural touchstone for
the generation who were nine years old in 2002 (or whenever Pokemon was
popular, I forget).

On the other hand, I've never heard of this "why the lucky stiff" guy (I only
clicked on this article because I couldn't parse the headline), although I
have to admit I've heard of his "(poignant) guide to Ruby" second-hand from a
friend who was complaining how annoying its writing style was. Having read his
biography, I'd have to say his achievements, which seem to be limited to
writing an online manual, a couple of libraries and speaking at a couple of
conferences, don't seem to be all that notable.

Perhaps I'd feel differently if the wikipedia article were listed under his
real name instead of his self-important handle. As it is, it kinda looks like
he wrote most of this himself. I don't bother to edit wikipedia but if I did I
think I'd vote for deletion.

~~~
tptacek
Way to just make shit up there. Wikipedia has full edit histories. You might
avail yourself of them, or of the article discussion page, where _why himself
formally requested the article be deleted. But hey, if it makes you feel
better to say "he wrote most of it himself", don't let reality stop you.

~~~
hugh
Wow, getting emotionally involved? Your tone really isn't at all appropriate
for this forum.

I said "it looks like he wrote it himself", not that he actually did (I know,
I read the talk page). From the content it's indistinguishable from a vanity
page (the most identifiable feature of a vanity page being that it works hard
to inflate minor achievements like speaking at conferences) but I understand
he has quite a number of fans so it's quite possible they wrote it.

------
danw
I'm not sure I understand why this is relevant?

~~~
kashif
Agreed. Why are we voting this stuff up?

~~~
thaumaturgy
"We" aren't. 30-odd people so far have promoted it, and the remaining majority
has no practical way to counter those votes.

~~~
tlrobinson
Upvote everything else?

------
danielha
This is one of the worst top articles I've seen yet on news.yc.

Thanks guys

~~~
Hexstream
You missed a lot of much worser ones. Lucky you.

------
andr
The horror!

------
lolb
Good.

