 | This article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging articles | | | List | This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
|
I take it in good faith that the restrictions and limitations which have been placed on this article (along with several others by the same author) have been put there to maintain the quality of the article and keep the junk out. I get that. A better approach would be to allow entries that don't have Wikipedia articles, but require that they must be verifiable in order to be allowed into the article. Make a requirement that entries must include a reliable source. This way the article can expand more while still maintaining the quality and giving a way to eliminate the junk as well, but without the severe limitation of "only Wikipedia articles allowed", which contradicts WP:NNC. Get off the notability high horse and get on the verifiability band wagon. Notability guidelines are for the creation of articles, not for content within the articles. Verifiability and reliable sources are the appropriate guidelines for all content within articles including list entries. Also, I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to "take ownership" of any article and create "special rules" for it even if they are the one who created it anyway. We all have to follow the same rules on every article the same way and once we post something, it no longer belongs to us, it belongs to the Wikipedia community now. Huggums537 (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
