Re: Wikipedia:Verifiability - Mailing lists as sources
| From: | Rick Harrison <rick@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Monday, February 25, 2008, 21:22 |
|---|
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:20:53 -0700, Dirk Elzinga <dirk.elzinga@...> wrote:
>Why does it matter so much that constructed languages make it to Wikipedia?
>In all of this discussion (and previous ones), no one has ever articulated
>clear and compelling reasons for including constructed languages on
>Wikipedia. What are these reasons?
I think auxiliary language enthusiasts seek a Wikipedia presence for their projects in
hopes of attracting users. I know of a couple of auxlangs that sought/are seeking ISO
639-3 codes because having one is viewed as proof of notability by some Wikipedia
editors, and is a pre-requisite (I think) for getting a Wikipedia _in_ the auxlang.
No doubt it was the same desire for attention/participants that prompted one person to
use a bot to generate 100,000 article stubs in the Volapuek Wikipedia. This raised the
Volapuek Wikipedia's position in the list of Wikipedias sorted by number of articles,
attracting a lot of attention, not all of it favorable. (One response was a proposal to
delete the entire Volapuek Wikipedia.)
Presumably some artlangers would want their favorite projects to be listed for similar
reasons: a feeling that one's art is recognized as significant and valid, or the possibility of
attracting participants to collaborative projects.
But Wikipedia is such a battleground I believe one has to think carefully about how much
energy one is willing to put into it. The influential editors communicate with each other
via secret mailing lists (see "Secret mailing list rocks Wikipedia" in The Register, Dec 4
2007, linked from wikitruth.info) so that they can gang up on anyone viewed as a heretic.
Replies