Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
technomancy.org
Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#2Without repeating the same boring arguments about whether everything should be covered on Wikipedia, and just stipulating, whether you truly agree with them or not, that we'll confine ourselves to Wikipedia's policy of requiring that articles both assert and document notability:
Doesn't it stand to reason that most "hackerspaces" aren't notable?
Wikipedia doesn't even have coverage for every major office building in Chicago. A typical hackerspace wouldn't even take a single floor in a typical Chicago high-rise.
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#3Without repeating the same boring arguments about whether everything should be covered on Wikipedia, and just stipulating, whether you truly agree with them or not, that we'll confine ourselves to Wikipedia's policy of requiring that articles both assert and document notability: Doesn't it stand to reason that most "hackerspaces" aren't notable? Wikipedia doesn't even have coverage for every major office building in…
Perhaps the test of notability for something like a hackerspace should be whether a successful (and thus de facto notable) company emerged from it?
I imagine that Y Combinator wouldn't be deserving of its own Wikipedia page if nothing had yet come of it. Why should other incubators be treated differently?
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#4Without repeating the same boring arguments about whether everything should be covered on Wikipedia, and just stipulating, whether you truly agree with them or not, that we'll confine ourselves to Wikipedia's policy of requiring that articles both assert and document notability: Doesn't it stand to reason that most "hackerspaces" aren't notable? Wikipedia doesn't even have coverage for every major office building in…
Perhaps the test of notability for something like a hackerspace should be whether a successful (and thus de facto notable) company emerged from it? I imagine that Y Combinator wouldn't be deserving of its own Wikipedia page if nothing had yet come of it. Why should other incubators be treated differently?
Well, it's more whether there are decent sources to document it, but yeah, that's probably most likely if some well-known company emerged from it.
Once upon a time there was something like a philosophical "notability" test, but since that led to interminable arguments, it's these days a lot closer to a descriptive "has been noted" test, which boils down to, "if someone says [citation needed], do you have one?". Where to draw the line is still controversial, but it's somewhere between, on the one hand, "is in every history book", and on the other, "has never been mentioned anywhere except on its founder's blog".
A decent number of the hackerspace articles do seem uncomfortably close to the 2nd case, with the articles actually being created by the people who run the hackerspace or are closely associated with it, and not citing any third-party sources for the information (i.e. something other than the hackerspace's own website or blog).
I must say I do find this rally-people-into-a-mob-to-defend-my-page aspect pretty distasteful, though. If you want to be part of Wikipedia, anyone can and should go and start helping out. If you don't, also fine. But a bunch of people who have no real interest in improving Wikipedia only showing up to promote things they're a fan of is a bit lame, especially when it reeks of people being mainly interested in the SEO. (Also happens on the other side, when occasionally there's mobs that show up demanding that Wikipedia delete something; those mobs also have no real interest in improving the encyclopedia more generally, or even familiarizing themselves with how and why things work as they do.)
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#5Without repeating the same boring arguments about whether everything should be covered on Wikipedia, and just stipulating, whether you truly agree with them or not, that we'll confine ourselves to Wikipedia's policy of requiring that articles both assert and document notability: Doesn't it stand to reason that most "hackerspaces" aren't notable? Wikipedia doesn't even have coverage for every major office building in…
There are much less hackerspaces per city (usually 1) than office blocks per city.
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#6I think, that Wikipedia should have "Donate to prevent deletion" button on every article ;)
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#7I think, that Wikipedia should have "Donate to prevent deletion" button on every article ;)
wow, that sounds like a really good idea. at least for things that i feel should stay on wikipedia. :)
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#8I think, that Wikipedia should have "Donate to prevent deletion" button on every article ;)
Yes, this is brilliant -- and could take care of Wikipedia's funding problems is one stroke.
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#9I don't understand the include everything mindset, and I think I'm in the inclusionist camp. If you encourage other people to put data on Wikipedia, the value of the data drops to zero from an economic and reputation exploitation standpoint.
For example, if you think there is value in having a comprehensive list of hacker spaces, set up a site that lists them and maintain it. You'll be known as the person who maintains that valuable resource, and since you homesteaded it, you can economically exploit it by putting ads on it, or taking signups. And no one else can take it down because of some kind requirements about its appropriateness for the internet.
I appreciate that every Star Trek episode is listed on Wikipedia, but it seemed more like a labor of love, more comprehensive, and more interesting (less sterile) when it was some backwater part of the internet where some hardcore fan personally maintained some massive compendium of Star Trek information. Now there is less of a reason, and requiries more dedication, to want to compete with Wikipedia's SEO authority. I mean, there are specialist sites like Star Trek wikis, LOtR wikis, and Wookipedia, but Wikipedia is comprehensive just enough to not want me seek more detailed info. (Nevermind that some of them have taken the economic exploitation to the extreme with the same shitty online gaming ad, we all know there is a sweet spot of the content:advertising ratio).
I mean who thought that Wikipedia would be the first place anyone would go for information on hacker spaces or information about a specific hacker space? It's a piggyback-on-Wikipedia's-SEO-only play.
Re: Lots of Hackerspaces on Wikipedia are suggested for deletion
#10Without repeating the same boring arguments about whether everything should be covered on Wikipedia, and just stipulating, whether you truly agree with them or not, that we'll confine ourselves to Wikipedia's policy of requiring that articles both assert and document notability: Doesn't it stand to reason that most "hackerspaces" aren't notable? Wikipedia doesn't even have coverage for every major office building in…
Why is inclusionism so bad? So what if we had a wikipedia article for every office building in Chicago or every Pokemon out there?