Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Dear all, I have spent some hours today trying to write some messages and argumentation to my wikipedia colleagues who have deleted the wikipedia entry on n-category cafe as being about a group blog of no notable importance. Many wikipedia articles use and sometimes cite nCafe, nLab etc. but they consider their occasional source nCafe not notable for a separate wikipedia entry (but nLab does have a wikipedia entry!); in the same time as a serious scholarly resource, nLab (and cafe as well) often cites wikipedia. On the other hand, many minor episode characters in Star Wars or in Tolkien-like works (including far less famous analogues) have large space devoted there. I think part of the reason is that many more wikipedia contributors are fact-lovers without feeling for real importance of the facts, and who are not engaged in real sholarly work than the opposite, so they weigh sholarly things with non-scholar criteria. In few extreme cases, scholars should react constructively to improve the situation.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Danski14#Notability_of_n-category_cafe
Here is Wikipedia’s N-category cafe before it was redirected to John Baez#n-category_cafe.
That entry has very little content, much less specifics about why the nCafe is notable. Zoran, your complaint to Danski14 only contains generalities about why you think the nCafe page is important, not material that could go on the page if it was reinstated.
The page was marked for possible deletion in October 2010 and no substantial content was added since then.
My own experience inclines me to think that maybe it’s better not to have a wikipedia page, since then you don’t have to worry about defending it from other people writing rubbish on it. (-:O
1 to 3 of 3