Wikipedia deleting RPG articles

[rounser]

Wikipedia trying to delete RPG articles

http://timbrannan.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/this-is-getting-stupid.html

Here are the articles in danger:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Buffalo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Loomis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Soth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vecna

If anyone can get Tim some links to 3rd party articles, reviews, things like that maybe he can fend off the deletionists for a while.

Maybe keep an eye out if there are more RPG articles that may have been targeted as well.

 

[Orius]

Looks like [MENTION=1241]BOZ[/MENTION] and his allies over there have already started trying to counter this. So that's a good sign.

 

[BOZ]

It's just the state of things, I guess. Some users have nothing better to do that look for stuff that they think looks weak to get rid of. Been on Wikipedia more than 5 years, and it's been going on since long before that. My consolation to that is I have contributed far more quality content that has been retained than anything which has been lost.

 

[billd91]

There are too many people getting too big for their britches if you ask me. One of wikipedia's strengths is its coverage of pop culture. Who gives a flying about notability from independent sources? Who do they think they are? Encyclopedia Britannica? If they're going to be a public sourced encyclopedia, let them be a public sourced encyclopedia and let the public decide what goes in it without fear of other people rooting it out.

 

[BOZ]

I can't disagree with you there, but there are a lot of people who will disagree with you so the deletionists are tolerated (and often encouraged).

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Clearly the Vecna article needs more links to the Head of Vecna story.

 

[GrayLinnorm]

I can't disagree with you there, but there are a lot of people who will disagree with you so the deletionists are tolerated (and often encouraged).

Not by me, they're not. And they really need to put a limit on how long it can be to delete an article. I really wish Jimmy Wales would put the smackdown on these creeps.

 

[SkidAce]

Clearly the Vecna article needs more links to the Head of Vecna story.

Well said, and perhaps a reference to a gazebo?

 

[Dragonblade]

There are too many people getting too big for their britches if you ask me. One of wikipedia's strengths is its coverage of pop culture. Who gives a flying about notability from independent sources? Who do they think they are? Encyclopedia Britannica? If they're going to be a public sourced encyclopedia, let them be a public sourced encyclopedia and let the public decide what goes in it without fear of other people rooting it out.

This. The entire notion that articles on wikipedia need to be deleted at all (unless they are factually incorrect) is frankly absurd. Its WIKIpedia, not a formal printed encyclopedia with a limited page count.

Who the hell are these people to decide what's notable or not notable? Who cares anyway? Don't think an article on Vecna is significant? Fine, don't read it. But others do want to read it, so leave it alone.

I go to wikipedia all the time to research all sorts of obscure pop culture info that I just can't find anywhere else. And yeah that sometimes includes looking up minor literary characters. I want those articles to be there when I go to look for them.

Who cares about notability? That's ridiculous. I love that wikipedia includes articles on obscure tidbits of knowledge. That's a feature, not a bug.

 

[Balesir]

Hmm - anyone up to add an Article to Wikipedia about "Deletionists" and how they set about identifying "weak" or "not worthy" Wikipedia articles and deleting them in an attempt to impose their own values and beliefs on readers and users?