Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
List of really, really stupid article ideas that you should not create (wikipedia.org)
20 points by uladzislau on July 24, 2014 | hide | past | favorite | 6 comments



I often wondered ever since Wikipedia started that if they just had slightly more involvement, they could handle all of this kind of content and the site would still be great. I also often wonder if the content that does get rejected should actually be there, and the site is worse without it.

That being said, there are still probably too many articles, especially in other languages, that could use more depth, and I guess that's been the driving force for some time, and I hope we don't give up.


I'm not sure that article attention is necessarily always going to be the limiting factor, otherwise you'd expect there to be piles and piles of fancruft all over Wikipedia, meticulously maintained by obsessive fans.

One argument for not being just a universal repository for any kind of information is that it may make it much harder to navigate to actual information you care about, where encyclopedias are supposed to generally be a digest of the information available about a subject. There's also the issue of proper namespacing for this sort of thing, since if you let there be an article on every single person and every single piece of information, you can imagine that there would be a large number of name collisions, making navigation a bit tricky (The disambiguation page for common names would be insanely long, for one thing).

I think the proper way to build a "repository of all knowledge" on top of Wikipedia would be to spin off daughter Wikis (e.g. wikitionary), where in-depth curated information can exist that break out content from Wiki articles (for example, Wiki has an article about a given album, but WikiMusic has an in-depth article on each song, with curated links to reviews and articles about it, etc). I think we're seeing some of that already with the various sister projects to Wikipedia.


If you really want a “repository of all knowledge”, though, the main thing you need is standardization of wiki APIs and dump formats, such that you could, say, create DB dump file that contained “Wikipedia, all its siblings, and every Wikia wiki” and fixed up all the links between them.


If there were any justice in the world, that article would be immediately nominated for expedited deletion, and every other wikimedia site spawned due to exclusions by wikipedia's rules would mercilessly make fun of them for it.


This article isn't in the main namespace, it's in the Wikipedia namespace, which is dedicated for essays and meta discussions about Wikipedia. The rules for deletion of Wikipedia-namespace articles are very different than the rules for deletion of main-namespace articles.

Even if it were deleted, the author could migrate it into his/her personal user-namespace User:username/<article title>, and it would have an even lower standard for inclusion.


There could be a near infinite list of stupid article ideas that would just be fine for them, namely any top 40 song; points for a page dedicated to its video; individual episodes of select science fiction tv shows, or nearly every anime character.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: