User:Draeco/END
Notability is a dangerous concept that limits the Wikipedia project. It is not enough to simply ignore this rule. We must be bold, unite, and reverse the damage. Notability must be stopped.
Illegitimacy
Notability is not policy. It is said to exist to "determine whether a topic merits its own article."{{cite encyclopedia
| url = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
| title = Notability
| encyclopedia = Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia
| author = Wikipedia contributors
| accessdate = 21 Sept 2009}} But this is unnecessary since the core policies of WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:NOR suffice to regulate content. Jimbo Wales himself cited these reasons when he [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Notability/Historical/Fame_and_importance&diff=next&oldid=2256536 spoke against] notability fore-runners "fame and importance" as reasons to delete an article.{{cite encyclopedia
| url = http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Notability/Historical/Fame_and_importance&diff=next&oldid=2256536
| title = Fame and Importance
| encyclopedia = Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia
| last = Wales
| first = Jimmy
| authorlink = Jimmy Wales
| date = 29 January 2004
| accessdate = 21 Sept 2009}} Debate has raged since then, but despite a lack of concensus, its creeping bureaucracy has a long history of expanding.
Damage
The first sentence of Wikipedia's main page for policies and guidelines contends that the two exist to further our goal of creating...the largest encyclopedia in history, both in terms of breadth and in terms of depth.{{cite encyclopedia
| url = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:POLICY
| title = Policies and Guidelines
| author = Wikipedia contributors
| encyclopedia = Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia
| accessdate = 21 Sept 2009}} Notability defeats this goal. It hinders the addition of articles that would broaden our scope. Once deleted, those articles cannot be deepend to provide greater quality.
The longer notability is tolerated, the more entrenched it will become in editors' minds and the very culture of Wikipedia. Editors will be reluctant to reconsider.{{cite journal
| title = Personality Characteristics of Wikipedia Members
| author = Yair Amichai–Hamburger, Naama Lamdan, Rinat Madiel, Tsahi Hayat
| journal = CyberPsychology & Behavior
| date = December 2008
| year = 2008
| volume = 11
| number = 6
| pages = 679–681
| doi = 10.1089/cpb.2007.0225
| pmid = 18954273
| url = http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cpb.2007.0225}} Already, many editors quote notability as if it were policy. It has become a blunt instrument to rationalize deletionism on AfD. Newcomers and bold editors who attempt to ignore the rule are beaten into submission by the sprawling pages of notability guidelines and bureaucracy of editors (and even admins) who have been conditioned to accept notability.{{cite web
| title = Bullypedia, A Wikipedian Who's Tired Of Getting Beaten Up
| last = McKenna
| first = Gene
| authorlink = User:Mckennagene
| date = 4 Sept 2009
| accessdate = 23 Sept 2009
| format = blog
| url = http://travel-industry.uptake.com/blog/2009/09/04/bullypedia-a-wikipedian-whos-tired-of-getting-beat-up/}} This situation must be righted.
References
{{reflist}}