User talk:Pennine rambler/Archive 2: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
m MBisanz moved page User talk:Rovington/Archive 2 to User talk:Pennine rambler/Archive 2: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Rovington" to "Pennine rambler" |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Welcome to my talk page''' |
|||
'The prime values of the talk page are communication, courtesy and consideration'. |
|||
[[Talk_page_guidelines|Talk Guidelines]] |
|||
Please [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|sign your name]] on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) |
|||
==Inclusionists and deletionists== |
|||
[[File:Rainbow dove image peace.jpg|thumb|100px|Peace]] |
|||
''An extract from The Times'' |
|||
'The deletionists say that an encyclopedia is not a dumping ground for facts; standards of notability have to be upheld or their pages will fill with trivia. Inclusionists reply that Wikipedia's great advantage is that it has no space limit and that an entry of interest to just a few people is justified. Niche articles will never trouble most people, since access is through search.' the article goes on to say 'It's on the discussion pages of articles nominated for deletion that anger creeps in. Policy documents are referred to only by abbreviations. There's WP:NEO (avoid neologisms), WP:NOR (no original research), WP:NOT (what Wikipedia is not, including a dictionary, a crystal ball and a democracy) and the favourite of the deletionists WP:NOTE (notability)' <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/3354752/Wikipedia-an-online-encyclopedia-torn-apart.html|Times Newspaper, 11 Oct 2007]</ref> |
|||
'''I have added the above little 'stub' in my talk not for a response but with a hope you enjoyed reading it and to give you a minute to think.''' |
|||
On my talk please do not revert my talk pages and please explain rather than just use acronyms. I prefer plain English. |
|||