5. Oh and .... yes, there is a real problem with the Notability pillar and related to that, with Verifiability. When they cracked down on Notability half a dozen years ago, they lost swathes of articles on internet-based things that haven't yet been written about in the New York Times. The entire area of paganism illustrates the dissonance between "things someone might need to look up" and "things scholars have written about" - plus the problem when scholars mostly write idiocy on a particular topic. (I also write about topics where recent scholars tend to write idiocy, so I fall afoul of the naive view that the latest scholarship is ipso facto the best.) So I have quite a bit of sympathy with the view that people and groups can legitimately differ as to what/who is notable, and Wikipedia should, I think, take a serious look at that (especially since they pay occasional lipservice to an ideal of countering entrenched bias). But "Wimyn should be judged by a different standard" is not what I mean.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2012-12-01 02:19 pm (UTC)M, again