[game_preservation] Should Wikipedia Be Responsible for Gaming's History?

[Alan Au]

There's a long-standing "debate" on Wikipedia about this very topic.  Well, not games preservation in particular, but about the concept of inclusiveness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deletionism_and_inclusionism_in_Wikipedia

As far as I can tell, the crux of the matter is locating suitable external sources--Wikipedia is fussy about that.

- Alan



> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:27:59 +0100

> From: jan_baart at yahoo.de

> To: game_preservation at igda.org

> Subject: Re: [game_preservation] Should Wikipedia Be Responsible for	Gaming's History?

> 

> 

> > The question should perhaps never be "Why shouldn't this be deleted?" 

> > but "Why can't this be included?". More pages doesn't make it harder 

> > to find info, it just makes it better :)

> >

> > Andrew

> >

> 

> That's precisely the right question Andrew. I don't get Wikipedia's 

> relevance-based approach at all. They don't that much extra storage for 

> additional articles and I'm sure anyways that the actual webspace is not 

> a significant cost factor. So, indeed, the question has to be: Why 

> exclude anything at all? As long as its properly researched and worth 

> its own entry instead of being a part of another one I'd say they should 

> allow it. The amount of deleted worthwile content I've come across is 

> astonishing. Imho Wikipedia might actually threaten its own strong 

> position by this approach in the long run.

> 

> Jan

> _______________________________________________

> game_preservation mailing list

> game_preservation at igda.org

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_preservation

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_preservation/attachments/20110120/7d32442f/attachment.htm>