Talk:Deakin University

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


User:Bilby - about this ... In my view, this is content that is on their website and is sourced only to their website; there isn't independent sourcing showing that this is noteworthy and deserves any WEIGHT here - it is not encyclopedic but rather brochure. Would you please explain your reasoning for including this here - how is this not a violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST? Jytdog (talk) 16:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm a bit lost. What in WP:NOTWEBHOST do you feel that it violates? It isn't related to dating, file storage, an memorial, or encyclopedia-related projects, and it isn't a personal homepage. Maybe I'm missing something? But I'm not sure which it is failing. - Bilby (talk) 21:19, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Its a very short extension of #1 listed there... editors often want to replicate company/organization websites here in WP. That's "not" what WP is for... Jytdog (talk) 21:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
1 doesn't mention anything about replicating company/organization websites, as far as I can tell. #1 seems to be about user pages. - Bilby (talk) 22:36, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
spirit. The spirit of #1 is that "Wikipedia is not a webhost" We are not here to used as someone's personal website. The same is true for organizations and companies; it is exactly parallel. (organizations and companies are, under the law, "people", to get hyper-technical) But I don't want to wikilawyer this. The big picture in NOT is that WP articles should be encyclopedic - summarizing accepted knowledge so that people can learn, and per the other policies we follow secondary sources that express accepted knowledge. Replicating content from an organization's website is just acting like a proxy for the organization or as a directory; there is nothing to learn from it. It is WP:NOT what we are here to do. I take you from your edit and your remarks above that you don't see it that way. So hm! Jytdog (talk) 23:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not really inclined to turn to vague "spirit of the thing" as a justification. The "spirit" of #1 is that you can't uses your personal user page as a means of self promotion or personal amusement. We can't really stretch that to say that we are not allowed to include organisational structure on an article about a university in mainspace.
The second point is worth discussing. What is unencyclopedic about the core structure of a university, and a list of their research institutes? Would you be happier if this was in prose? I'll see if I can convert it this way - perhaps a raw list is off-putting. - Bilby (talk) 00:02, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
The spirit of the policies and guidelines is what matters most~=! I've been considering adding "or company website" to that part of NOT and will eventually propose it. The list in my view is just a laundry list, like an index page of (their) website. Jytdog (talk) 00:35, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
That's all fine, and I'm certainly open to an argument about why a list of the organisational structure of a university is inappropriate for an article about the university. But it seems the discussion won't be viable if based on NOTWEBHOST. - Bilby (talk) 01:38, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
We don't see this the same way which is surprising to me. In my view this kind of laundry list is really mundane wrong-headed editing that attempts to make Wikipedia into webhosts for their subjects; there is no context - nothing that says why the structure matters which means nothing that says why it should be in WP. I get it that you don't see it that way and i don't know how to communicate it any better than I have. I won't revert but I really don't understand why this should be in WP. I am moving on. Jytdog (talk) 02:36, 10 October 2016 (UTC)