User:MSchmahl
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
Contents |
[edit] Useful links
- Related Changes: WikiProject Poker
- Short Watchlist
- Newpages
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 2
[edit] Article criteria
In no particular order, an article should:
- be organized well
- be written well
- engage the reader's attention
- be neither too short nor too long
- use lists appropriately and sparingly
- be well-referenced
- be comprehensive
- use a neutral tone
- include appropriate illustrations
- be independent of temporal and cultural context
[edit] Featured articles
[edit] Tomorrow's featured article
Ziaur Rahman was the 6th President of Bangladesh and founder of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. While an officer in the Pakistan Army, Zia's unit captured the Kalurghat radio station at the onset of the Bangladesh Liberation War and declared the independence of Bangladesh. Recognised as a war hero, he would be honoured with the Bir Uttom in 1972. A high-ranking officer in the Bangladesh Army, Zia was appointed chief of army staff following the Assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975. Although briefly overthrown in a coup d'etat, Zia returned to power in a counter-coup organised by Colonel Abu Taher. Declaring himself president in 1977, Zia won a referendum held in 1978. Founding the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, Zia won widespread popular support for stabilising the nation and leading it in a new direction. A right-wing politician, Zia established free-market policies in a 19-point programme of industrialisation and development. He adopted policies bringing the government increasingly under Islam, which he imbibed in the national constitution. Zia controversially pardoned the assassins of Sheikh Mujib by signing the Indemnity Act and rehabilitated individuals who had supported the Pakistan Army. A popular yet controversial leader, Zia was assassinated in 1981 in an abortive military coup. (more...)
Recently featured: Gremlins 2: The New Batch – George Washington – New Carissa
[edit] Mathematics featured article
Portal:Mathematics/Featured article/2007 14
[edit] Philosophy featured article
Portal:Philosophy/Featured article/2007-14
[edit] What is "notable"?
Recently, I've been browsing some proposed policies, essays, and user pages regarding "notability", "fame", "importance", "relevance", and the like.
"Notable" is synonymous with "verifiable".
I agree, in essence, with Jimbo Wales's opinion that 'notable' is shorthand for WP:V combined with WP:NPOV. The fact that a topic has been covered, or referred to, by multiple, independent sources, makes that topic notable enough for coverage by Wikipedia. Note the emphasis on "multiple". Any single source can be biased, confused, or hoaxed, but if several independent sources agree on something, it's much more likely to be a representation or approximation of Truth.
A "notable" topic is one on which a casual visitor might be looking for further information.
Let's assume, for a moment, that Wikipedia has attained its goal of being a reputable encyclopedia. Imagine a (non-editor) reader visits Wikipedia, with the intention of acquiring a bit of knowledge. In this situation, "notable" means: "Is a random visitor likely to be seeking information on this topic?" If so, Wikipedia should attempt to provide some reliable information on the topic. For example, my physics professor might make a passing comment about Qubit Field Theory which intrigues me. So, (in an ideal world), I come to Wikipedia and look it up. At present I only find a stub, but I also find a suggestion for further reading. On the other hand, Fred Johnson, my upstairs neighbor, who works at 7-Eleven on the graveyard shift, is not likely to be the topic of a search by anyone who is not personally acquainted with him. So Qubit Field Theory has an article, and Fred Johnson doesn't.
"Notable" means that, in the absence of a Wikipedia article on a topic, I would still have heard of the topic.
This is perhaps the most controversial facet of my viewpoint of notability. But perhaps it is the most essential. Wikipedia, being quite consciously a tertiary source, is not in the business of creating knowledge (WP:OR, WP:NOT). The business of Wikipedia, rather, is to compile and report on human knowledge, acquired through other means. This is one reason that, in my opinion, The Game was correctly deleted. If I had not stumbled on the Wikipedia article on The Game, I would have remained blissfully unaware of its existence. On the other hand, I have heard about Mao and Nomic independently of Wikipedia (see Metamagical Themas et al), so their inclusion is appropriate
[edit] Regarding lists
Simply put, I think most lists on Wikipedia are inappropriate. Remember, Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia. Having a "List of English words containing Q not followed by U" is not in the nature of an encyclopedia. It smells like original research and is an easy target for linkspam. Some lists become a dumping-ground for links. The {{listdev}} template actively encourages users to add items to lists without troubling them to ask themselves, "Is this information appropriate for use in an encyclopedia?" These lists often grow to huge proportions, overwhelming and diluting the point of the article itself.
This is not to say that all lists are bad. A list should, like an article itself, illustrate and exemplify the concept under discussion. For example, a "list of police states" could appropriately include 1984, since this is a canonical example familiar to most of the English-speaking world. However, such a list could easily be polluted with every movie, novel, short story, video game, or weblog that portrays such a government. Ideally, a list should contain no more than six, or at the extreme upper limit, maybe a dozen entries.
I agree that lists are (occasionally) entertaining, but should an encyclopedia really include an article such as a list of fictional cats?
(Note: I made up the example "List of English words containing Q not followed by U" off the top of my head, but then searched for it, and found it actually existed!)
[edit] Webcomics that I like
| Sluggy Freelance | read it |
| The Order of the Stick | read it |
| General Protection Fault | read it |
| Kevin & Kell | read it |
| 8-bit Theater | read it |
[edit] Test pages
Mark V. Shaney writes a Wikipedia article.
Some excerpts:
- Roosevelt's lasting popular legacy is the spectral type G2V yellow star at the Mount Rushmore Memorial.
- "Our 1905 was clearly orchestrated by the Moon and the Sun itself orbits the center of the structure. The architecture commands attention by virtue of their visual display.
- The Protocols can be viewed directly without discomfort or safely with binoculars. Hazy conditions, atmospheric dust, and high humidity contribute to the general election race. The election, normally held in November, will take place in an airplane.
- In a decisive move, Taft's people purchased support of a top-secret military space shuttle.
- From about 0.7 solar radii, solar material is hot and dense enough or hot enough to garner 435 electoral votes.
- As President he firmly believed in the ambient gas in the 19th century.
- After the assassination of Czar Alexander II in 1881, he dropped out of law and preferred judges rather than Egyptians.
- Different latitudes of the chapel were festooned with a council of bishops.
[edit] A koan
One evening, my father asked me, "What have you learned today?"
I replied "Nothing,"
My father beat me and sent me to bed with no supper.
The following evening, my father asked me, "What have you learned today?"
I replied "Nothing."
My father, with a tear in his eye, exclaims, "Most wonderful!" and embraced me.
