i read an article in the age newspaper today which talked about the two camps which have emerged in the1000 strong wikipedia administrator field, namely the ‘deletionists’ and the ‘inclusionists’. having recently watched the lord of the rings and also being in the middle of a david gemmell saga the thought of two waring factions in the quest for ‘truth’ caught my attention. so I decided to investigate more…
according to the article and various web sources, the rise of the deletionists – who assert that wikipedia in not a dumping ground for facts, that standards of notability have to be upheld – is threatening the ‘wa’ of an otherwise democratic and peaceful world ofwikipedia. inclusionists say that all information should be included even if it is of interest to just a few.
i did a quick seach on the meta-wiki, the site which discusses how to manage wikipedia, and discovered there is this whole seething underbelly of debate and discontent going on. so if you think that you are ‘wasting time’ by getting addicted to online cartoon avatar lookalikes of yourself (my favourite is the southpark one, btw) then go and check this out and feel a bit better about yourself. ie “Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgements About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are In Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn’t Mean They are Deletionist”. nice, but more to the point, wtf?!
for the purpose of comic relief I am posting the entire set of ‘wikipedian philosophies’ below for you to enjoy. which do you subscribe to? I havent made up my mind yet – i need to read them all and make an informed decision.