Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

chemconnector.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 96 posts

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#41

Post by brm »

jphackworth wrote: post #25
mixmax wrote: post #15

I once had a heated discussion with a classical violinist about who the most known Dane was outside of Denmark. She insisted that it had to be Carl Nielsen, a composer, whom she was sure everyone would know. All her friends knew Carl Nielsen, and many of them could play his most known symphonies from memory. I'd only vaguely heard of him, and contended that maybe Hans Christian Andersen would be more known, since Dis…

I'm guessing that since The Lord Of The Rings movie, Viggo Mortensen is the most famous Dane. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viggo_Mortensen

I'd put equal money on Helena Christensen

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#42

Post by the-cakeboss »

kristopolous wrote: post #24
VladRussian wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>3.Has made unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre, such as beginning a trend in pornography; i bet it is much harder than produce a new scientific theory ( or may be it is just my Math MS talking :)

I've often wondered who the Hitchcocks and Coppolas were of the Adult Film Genre. I've considered the idea that there are masterpiece films, dismissed for being erotic, that have gone unseen and unappreciated by the masses. Alas, I have yet to find a nice thorough list, akin to the AFI top 100 for the lewd. * If you know where this is, maybe you can also direct me to some reputable cult list; you know, that would hav…

There's actually been much debate towards whether pornography can even be considered art, thus calling into question whether a Hitchcock or Coppolas of the Adult Film Genre can even exist.

I personally am of the belief that porn isn't art, due to its use and audience. When someone views porn, the pornographic material is almost invariably acting as a means to an end, namely satisfying sexual desires of the viewer. Art on the other hand isn't a mean to any end. Art is to be appreciated for what it is.

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#43

Post by kristopolous »

the-cakeboss wrote: post #42
kristopolous wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've often wondered who the Hitchcocks and Coppolas were of the Adult Film Genre. I've considered the idea that there are masterpiece films, dismissed for being erotic, that have gone unseen and unappreciated by the masses. Alas, I have yet to find a nice thorough list, akin to the AFI top 100 for the lewd. * If you know where this is, maybe you can also direct me to some reputable cult list; you know, that would hav…

There's actually been much debate towards whether pornography can even be considered art, thus calling into question whether a Hitchcock or Coppolas of the Adult Film Genre can even exist. I personally am of the belief that porn isn't art, due to its use and audience. When someone views porn, the pornographic material is almost invariably acting as a means to an end, namely satisfying sexual desires of the viewer. Ar…

What about the porno chic movement?

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#44

Post by dotBen »

andrewfelix wrote: post #38
eropple wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I lived in Maine for 22 years and really like the place. Can I not objectively write about it?

Without a doubt you could give some great insights and a lot of useful information. But to answer your question; No, you alone could not write an objective encyclopedia article on the subject.

Ok, so if a bunch of folks write about a given scientist - 2 being friends of the subject, the rest not - then by this logic the resultant copy they create as a collective should be objective. Great, problem solved.

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#45

Post by Helianthus »

sanxiyn wrote: post #16
mixmax wrote: post #15

I once had a heated discussion with a classical violinist about who the most known Dane was outside of Denmark. She insisted that it had to be Carl Nielsen, a composer, whom she was sure everyone would know. All her friends knew Carl Nielsen, and many of them could play his most known symphonies from memory. I'd only vaguely heard of him, and contended that maybe Hans Christian Andersen would be more known, since Dis…

You are right about random strangers on the street, but Wikipedia's official policy is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people) Within Wikipedia, notability is an inclusion criterion based on the encyclopedic suitability of an article topic. The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"…

unless you take the obvious extension to how humans process worth, significance, interest, and unusualness in order to derive "famous."

in which case it is clear that the topic asks why porn stars are more famous than scientists.

and that it is also clear that the topic asks why porn stars are considered more significant than scientists given the numerous noble achievements given to mankind by scientists.

let's take a step back for a second and see if we can re-read "noble achievements given to mankind" without snickering.

In short, whatsoever gets attention on wikipedia deserves attention by dint of it having gotten attention. that's the whole point, innit?

So we're really just complaining when we try to draw more attention to scientists. Just as we're complaining if we're irritated that pokemon trivia gets more lengthy treatment on Wikipedia than important historical battles/chemical reactions/poems.

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#46

Post by Helianthus »

the-cakeboss wrote: post #42
kristopolous wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've often wondered who the Hitchcocks and Coppolas were of the Adult Film Genre. I've considered the idea that there are masterpiece films, dismissed for being erotic, that have gone unseen and unappreciated by the masses. Alas, I have yet to find a nice thorough list, akin to the AFI top 100 for the lewd. * If you know where this is, maybe you can also direct me to some reputable cult list; you know, that would hav…

There's actually been much debate towards whether pornography can even be considered art, thus calling into question whether a Hitchcock or Coppolas of the Adult Film Genre can even exist. I personally am of the belief that porn isn't art, due to its use and audience. When someone views porn, the pornographic material is almost invariably acting as a means to an end, namely satisfying sexual desires of the viewer. Ar…

If you're still categorizing art into "not art" and "art" you have a long way to go. As you say, Art is to be appreciated for what it is.

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#47

Post by brc »

mixmax wrote: post #15

I once had a heated discussion with a classical violinist about who the most known Dane was outside of Denmark. She insisted that it had to be Carl Nielsen, a composer, whom she was sure everyone would know. All her friends knew Carl Nielsen, and many of them could play his most known symphonies from memory. I'd only vaguely heard of him, and contended that maybe Hans Christian Andersen would be more known, since Dis…

Round my parts the most famous Dane is Prince Frederik (sp?), because he picked up a real estate agent while on holidays and turned her into a princess. Still the classic holiday romance story. The trash magazines are full of the royal couple and their children, and they get regular mentions on the nightly news.

You can laugh all you want at Royals and Royal Weddings, but they still have a positive impact on international relations, which I'm pretty sure was their original use case 10 centuries ago.

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#48

Post by yichi »

sanxiyn wrote: post #16
mixmax wrote: post #15

I once had a heated discussion with a classical violinist about who the most known Dane was outside of Denmark. She insisted that it had to be Carl Nielsen, a composer, whom she was sure everyone would know. All her friends knew Carl Nielsen, and many of them could play his most known symphonies from memory. I'd only vaguely heard of him, and contended that maybe Hans Christian Andersen would be more known, since Dis…

You are right about random strangers on the street, but Wikipedia's official policy is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people) Within Wikipedia, notability is an inclusion criterion based on the encyclopedic suitability of an article topic. The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"…

Wikipedia actually doesn't really care about you being "worthy" of notice or interesting. What it actually cares about is that if there are reliable sources that could back up your claim, which is what Notability is mostly about. It's there for a more pragmatic reason, of writing a encyclopedia where contents could be verified by an external source.

Re: Why are pornstars more notable than scientists on Wikipedia?

#49

Post by brc »

darth_static wrote: post #6
scarmig wrote: post #5

Because there are probably fewer brand name pornstars out there than people who hold a professorship of some kind?

Did you even read the article? Have a look at this site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pornographic_actresses_... and try telling me with a straight face that all those actresses have a greater right to a Wikipedia page than the professors that the author mentions.

Having just visited that page, it's unfortunate that the wholesome-looking young lady currently in rotation asking for donations appears at the top of it. Sometimes banner ads can really not suit the page content.
Post reply on HN