Node.js wikipedia entry marked for deletion for not being notable • Hacker News Board

Re: Node.js wikipedia entry marked for deletion for not being notable

#31

Post by justincormack » Tue, Apr 12, 2011, 8:53 AM UTC

aberkowitz wrote: post #28

derleth wrote: post #15

Let's not go nuts about this, OK? Like it or not, Wikipedia is the web's jumping-off point for serious knowledge about a given subject, especially technical subjects, and having citations in the article gives people reasonable places to jump off to. So don't spam the deletion discussion. Add good citations and references instead.

I don't advocate going nuts about it, but Wikipedia's deletion policies often lead to the permanent removal of interesting topics. There are things that I have learned from Wikipedia that no one else will ever be able to read - because some arbitrary decision maker decided it wasn't important. That's what frustrates people.

Name the articles. If they are useful I am quite happy to rework them into something salvageable.

In most of the cases what is deleted has no real content, but a year or so later someone will recreate the article well, probably not knowing it had been deleyed.

Re: Node.js wikipedia entry marked for deletion for not being notable

#32

Post by silentbicycle » Tue, Apr 12, 2011, 12:14 PM UTC

silentbicycle wrote: post #24

Is it notable, though? Serious question. I mean, Twisted and Tornado have actual references . (Eventmachine does not, but whatever.) Node currently has two, one of which is a linkbait-y post on readwriteweb, the other is an extremely meager wiki template page. Ergo, it isn't notable .

In the wikipedia notability guideline sense, of course - if you don't like it, add references.

I mean, the page about the villain from Sonic the Hedgehog ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Eggman) has 47 references.

Re: Node.js wikipedia entry marked for deletion for not being notable

#33

Post by mturmon » Tue, Apr 12, 2011, 6:15 PM UTC

silentbicycle wrote: post #32

silentbicycle wrote: post #24

Is it notable, though? Serious question. I mean, Twisted and Tornado have actual references . (Eventmachine does not, but whatever.) Node currently has two, one of which is a linkbait-y post on readwriteweb, the other is an extremely meager wiki template page. Ergo, it isn't notable .

In the wikipedia notability guideline sense, of course - if you don't like it, add references. I mean, the page about the villain from Sonic the Hedgehog ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Eggman ) has 47 references.

What a great article. I read your reply and I thought, this is clearly a case of fortification against deletion ("Doctor Eggman doth protest too much").

But then, after a look at the article, it's clear that you can't make a good case for deletion after all. There's a lot of info there, a lot of deep cross-links, etc.

Re: Node.js wikipedia entry marked for deletion for not being notable

#34

Post by silentbicycle » Tue, Apr 12, 2011, 7:39 PM UTC

mturmon wrote: post #33

silentbicycle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the wikipedia notability guideline sense, of course - if you don't like it, add references. I mean, the page about the villain from Sonic the Hedgehog ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Eggman ) has 47 references.

What a great article. I read your reply and I thought, this is clearly a case of fortification against deletion ("Doctor Eggman doth protest too much"). But then, after a look at the article, it's clear that you can't make a good case for deletion after all. There's a lot of info there, a lot of deep cross-links, etc.

Wikipedia has a lot of surface area. Another favorite example of mine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_fish_on_stamp...

I'm not sure deleting stubs really gains much (http://forre.st/storage --> "here's a nickel, go buy another gigabyte"), but adding sources really does improve articles. There's concrete info about node.js that people can cite (and the less hype-ish, the better).