
Wikipedia’s Notability Policy: What Is It and Why It Must Go - NewEraOfLiberty
https://medium.com/wikipedia-equality/wikipedias-notability-policy-what-is-it-and-why-it-must-go-2add31a0a9a
======
louithethrid
I wish Wikipedia had a parallel - amateur Wikki, where "deprecated" articles
go. If your official search yields nothing, or you dont find what you search
for there - the deprecated article is shown at the end of the link.

Edit: Also, they could allow for a more specific random wikipedia page. My
startpage is random Wikipedia, and its polluted with boring towns and country,
and unimportant Persons, while i crave for engineering feats

------
setr
I don't understand what the author imagines Wikipedia purpose to be

As far as I can tell, the change the author wants is to make wikipedia the
source of truth itself, and write articles on anyone so long as they produced
some kind of media; but since I guess referring to other sources of writing on
the creator is unreliable (unless they're cis white rich men?), I'm not sure
what source wiki editors are supposed to refer to, beyond their own knowledge

~~~
duskwuff
And if you try to relax the notability criteria for biographies of living
people, you run squarely into another problem: those articles are inherently
sensitive. If you don't require that facts be tracable to reliable sources,
libel and self-promotion start to leak in very quickly.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_livin...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons)

------
matt_wulfeck
> _If the Notability criteria is abolished, it can be replaced by a Cultural
> Contribution criteria, where inclusion is based on contribution to the total
> culture of humanity_

I really can't see why that would ever be better than "three in depth links".
It seems extremely subjective. How do you even accurately define and measure
that description?

> _But as we previously discussed, this policy actually has severe social
> justice implications_

This to me seems at the heart of the authors discontent. Unfortunately even
online encyclopedias aren't safe from social justice pressures in this day and
age.

~~~
DanBC
>This to me seems at the heart of the authors discontent. Unfortunately even
online encyclopedias aren't safe from social justice pressures in this day and
age.

Rightly so. If I find it easier to get information about pokemon than about a
female scientist who's made significant contributions to her field there's a
problem.

~~~
matt_wulfeck
If you can't find 3 outside sources about that scientist, is that Wikipedia's
fault? I don't think the bar is very high. It seems to me the issue is not
Wikipedia. Wikipedia reflects society, it doesn't represent it.

------
Doxin
I feel like the biggest problem with the notability policy is that it
basically disallows articles on anything niche. There's a game[0] which has
several tens of thousands of users and a lively community, yet wikipedia
refuses any article to be written about it.

[0][http://powdertoy.co.uk/](http://powdertoy.co.uk/)

------
CM30
In other words, she wants Wikipedia to become Tv Tropes:

[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Administrivia/ThereIsN...](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Administrivia/ThereIsNoSuchThingAsNotability)

I guess that could work, though it could get out of control real quick.

------
hayd
> TaraElla is a singer-songwriter, author and blogger

For the moment she doesn't have a page on Wikipedia.

~~~
duskwuff
She does have an account on Wikipedia, but it also looks as though she hasn't
been active on the site since 2014. So it seems rather presumptuous for her to
be making grand statements about Wikipedia policy...

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Taraella](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Taraella)

------
anotheryou
Why not at least make wiki-b-sides and add a big warning to the b-site pages?

Is review the bottleneck? Or why can't the lamppost in front of my window not
have its own page?

~~~
oxguy3
No one reads the warnings on Wikipedia pages. Having pages that aren't
considered officially maintained is messy and would probably lead to people
seeing Wikipedia as having lower-quality articles overall.

~~~
anotheryou
Take a different domain, invert the colors

