Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The claim of "other stuff exists" most often arises in article deletion debate, where it is often used in the following manner. Examples: Keep There's an article on x, and this is just as famous as that. –LetsKeepIt! 04:04, 4 April 2004 (UTC) Delete We do not have an article on y, so we should not have an article on this. –GetRidOfIt! 04:04 ...
This page details arguments that are commonly seen in deletion discussions that have been identified as generally unsound and unconvincing. These are arguments that should generally be avoided – or at the least supplemented with a better-grounded rationale for the position taken, whether that be "keep", "delete" or some other objective.
Conversely, non-inclusion is not an indication of non-notability. Since Wikipedia is continuously growing and expanding, new subjects and types of articles get included all the time. To suggest that a particular article is non-notable because no other similar articles exist would stunt the growth of Wikipedia, and do more harm than good.
The new title is "When to use or avoid 'other stuff exists' arguments". If the answer to "when to use" was "never", that would be a strange title to use to make things clearer - surely something like "Avoid 'other stuff exists' arguments" would have been far better. That conversation only closed on May 6 - less than two weeks ago.
A favourite line from a movie or catchy lyric, a potent phrase used in argument, juicy facts of interest to fans, a punch-line or zinger; these are all very interesting, but usually all that can be informatively written about topic "X" is: "X is a _____ found in _____." Just about everything listed on Wikipedia:Millionth topic pool.
Your bouncing bundle of joy on the way does not qualify to have an article simply because they will exist. Leprechauns and fairies do not qualify to have an article simply because people think they exist – but their place in the world's culture makes them notable. If any of those have articles, then there are other reasons why they are notable.
The last question can be answered definitively: NO. If an editor cannot find enough information on a subject to be able to write at least four non-repetitive sentences about the subject, then the article should not be started until there is sufficient information to "do it justice."
An article should not be about two similar but distinct subjects. For example, the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, though nearby, each have their own articles. The only time the word "and" should be used in the title is if it is an actual part of the subject's name (e.g. Bosnia and Herzegovina)