Editing Talk:1665: City Talk Pages
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
I just had to go check out the talk page on my hometown. Oh my goodness, I didn't realize... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.65|108.162.221.65]] 02:03, 9 April 2016 (UTC) sam | I just had to go check out the talk page on my hometown. Oh my goodness, I didn't realize... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.65|108.162.221.65]] 02:03, 9 April 2016 (UTC) sam | ||
β | + | == Notability == | |
Notability is not really a criterion for including material in articles. It is a criterion for whether to create an article based on a particular topic. Big difference there. There is plenty of information that will never meet notability thresholds that is perfectly fine to include in an article. Complicating this problem is the fact that many Wikipedians do not understand this distinction. It is therefore an entirely plausible situation that some Wikilawyer would try to suppress useful information by denying its notability. This would not be an actually tenable position, though, and therefore the above "explanation" of it is incorrect and incomplete. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.139|162.158.142.139]] 02:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC) | Notability is not really a criterion for including material in articles. It is a criterion for whether to create an article based on a particular topic. Big difference there. There is plenty of information that will never meet notability thresholds that is perfectly fine to include in an article. Complicating this problem is the fact that many Wikipedians do not understand this distinction. It is therefore an entirely plausible situation that some Wikilawyer would try to suppress useful information by denying its notability. This would not be an actually tenable position, though, and therefore the above "explanation" of it is incorrect and incomplete. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.139|162.158.142.139]] 02:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC) |