User talk:Sj/note

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

Interesting comments. I think the important thing to consider is that whatever repository is devised for non-notable but verifiable info, or other removed content, should remain open to continued collaboration. Otherwise its prospects for improvement will be limited and in some cases eliminated, if the subject matter's nature is such that it can never clear the notability hurdle. Thus, even improvements such as WP:PWD fall short of the mark of accomplishing all that is needed. A blanked article has no hope of becoming and remaining unblanked if the subject is non-notable, and yet the information contained therein may be useful to some readers. Readers can view the removed text but that content cannot improve through the normal wiki process because we are compelling it to remain blanked unless it can meet our inclusion criteria. Tisane (talk) 07:49, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed that continued collaboration is an essential piece. I was thinking it could simply be a subproject of WP, or pages on WP with a different skin that makes it clear that these articles don't yet seem to be notable. Pure Wiki Deletion or other methods that make the removed versions visible do actually allow editing -- but after each spate of edits, if the result is still considered NN, someone else can blank it again...
I think a site like Deletionpedia could be the answer if it allowed continued collaboration and improvement of deleted articles, and if it integrated Wikipedia's data (such as page existence and categorization) through features such as mw:Extension:RPED. Tisane (talk) 08:46, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


BYOND - a game-creation suite with its own mime types (DMB, DMS), 20-30k users, an average of ~8k simultaneous players at weekly peak. Not published about in traditionally 'notable' sources. Had hundreds of edits to its fairly short (not terribly well-written) article here, which was deleted a few times. A typical example of a subject that has a new article written about it every year or so by a different user who is likely surprised to find that there is none to begin with.

How do we make this process easier? If we want these editors to work somewhere other than "Wikipedia", we should provide a canonical place, either by starting a subproject appropriate for it, or by directing people to a canonical partner of ours that supports that sort of work. What we should not do is continue to invite people in with "everyone can edit" and then delete their work without redirection of their excellent energies.