To illustrate my point I have added some software and it was removed because it was not notable, some months later I discovered a whole set of pages listing software, like: List of Jabber client software or the whole Free Software Portal

The interesting thing to me is how Wikipedia contradicts itself and has a crowd of groupies who votes against you like machine guns.

To illustrate my point I have added some software and it was removed because it was not notable, some months later I discovered a whole set of pages listing software, like: List of Jabber client software or the whole Free Software Portal

Privacy aside, without a notability requirement, what would stop Wikipedia from becoming a repository of MySpace and Facebook profiles - and a reprint of every obituary, wedding announcement, corporate press release, and so on? I don’t see why that supports the mission of an encyclopedia. And, as Seth pointed out, each article itself may have a tiny cost, but when there are millions of them, that’s far from free.

You’ve got to draw a line somewhere. There may be nuances to notability - and Wikipedia folks may be wrong on WHT V - but I wouldn’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. (Nor do I plan to spend the rest of my day on this issue. It’s - ahem - not notable enough!)

Privacy aside, without a notability requirement, what would stop Wikipedia from becoming a repository of MySpace and Facebook profiles - and a reprint of every obituary, wedding announcement, corporate press release, and so on? I don’t see why that supports the mission of an encyclopedia. And, as Seth pointed out, each article itself may have a tiny cost, but when there are millions of them, that’s far from free.

You’ve got to draw a line somewhere. There may be nuances to notability - and Wikipedia folks may be wrong on WHT V - but I wouldn’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. (Nor do I plan to spend the rest of my day on this issue. It’s - ahem - not notable enough!)

I doubt that Taft V would worry about a Wikipedia entry, but there are plenty of people about whom information is in reliable public sources that would rightly feel exposed by having that information republished on Wikipedia.

I doubt that Taft V would worry about a Wikipedia entry, but there are plenty of people about whom information is in reliable public sources that would rightly feel exposed by having that information republished on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Georg_of_Austria

But I have one question:

Here’s another rule that is completely impossible to adhere to:

An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is “do no harm”.

OK, how exactly could I write an article about GWB and adhere to that guideline?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Georg_of_...

But I have one question:

Here’s another rule that is completely impossible to adhere to:

An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is “do no harm”.

OK, how exactly could I write an article about GWB and adhere to that guideline?

Disk space is now so cheap that including him is effectively free.

While frequently asserted, the accumulated cost is NOT free. It’s not just the cost of a few bytes of disk space. It’s in context of hosting, and the backups, and bandwidth from robots, etc. etc. etc.

Each article has a very tiny cost - but they do add up. To the point that Wikipedia has million-dollar hosting costs nowadays. That’s NOT free.

That may not be the real reason - but it’s a reason.

Disk space is now so cheap that including him is effectively free.

While frequently asserted, the accumulated cost is NOT free. It’s not just the cost of a few bytes of disk space. It’s in context of hosting, and the backups, and bandwidth from robots, etc. etc. etc.

Each article has a very tiny cost - but they do add up. To the point that Wikipedia has million-dollar hosting costs nowadays. That’s NOT free.

That may not be the real reason - but it’s a reason.

Two other points: The “no original research” rule means that only information that’s been published in newspapers or other reliable sources would qualify for inclusion. For most people, no information at all has been published about them in a reliable public source, so it wouldn’t be possible to write a Wikipedia entry that qualifies. Even for people who have had information about them published, it would almost always be things like their age, home town, where they went to school–hardly the sort of information people generally consider sensitive.

Second, the “Biographies of living persons” guidelines also provide significant protections for ordinary people. It states that birthdays, addresses, and other contact information should be omitted for non-famous living people. It also states that unsourced material about living people should be deleted immediately rather than merely tagged as unsourced.

Two other points: The “no original research” rule means that only information that’s been published in newspapers or other reliable sources would qualify for inclusion. For most people, no information at all has been published about them in a reliable public source, so it wouldn’t be possible to write a Wikipedia entry that qualifies. Even for people who have had information about them published, it would almost always be things like their age, home town, where they went to school–hardly the sort of information people generally consider sensitive.

Second, the “Biographies of living persons” guidelines also provide significant protections for ordinary people. It states that birthdays, addresses, and other contact information should be omitted for non-famous living people. It also states that unsourced material about living people should be deleted immediately rather than merely tagged as unsourced.

Note that there is no good way to figure out what pages have been deleted and rescue them for an ‘inclusivist-pedia’, either. That irritates me to no end.

Note that there is no good way to figure out what pages have been deleted and rescue them for an ‘inclusivist-pedia’, either. That irritates me to no end.