Right. So, for the second time in a month, the “Tara Hunt” entry on Wikipedia has been marked for deletion. My notable sources not notable enough. The accusations of Dan Fost’s bias are enough to make me giggle. I do think he is a fan of BarCamp, but me? Not in the way the Wikipedian implies.
Either way…did I think I deserved to be up there in the first place? I don’t know. I remember when John told me he entered it…I was delighted. I was even more delighted when it remained up for quite sometime. However, a part of me wondered all along whether I quite meet the threshold for an entry.
The whole ‘famous for 15 people’ thing is making Wikipedia an interesting place to watch. In the previous call for deletion, there were Wikipedians who said I was notable, citing references from other notables on Wikipedia, Pinko Marketing (and references to that), Google search results for “Tara Hunt” + marketing, etc. Others said no way, that my article read like a resume (I didn’t write it).
There are oodles of entries on Wikipedia like this, though. Debatable ‘notables’, some who obviously do use their pages as their resumé, many people who have, obviously, accomplished a lot in their lifetime, but who are not widely known for these accomplishments and missing any ‘notable third party sources’. Others I searched for are nowhere to be found, who are well-known authors, presenters, inventors and real thought leaders. But they haven’t been quoted or featured by some national publication to be verified as mattering to history. And all judgements on “delete” or “keep” are still made by a handful of individuals.
Is Wikipedia the people’s encyclopedia? Well, no. Not really. I mean, it gets closer than the Encyclopedia Britannica, but it uses similar editorial guidelines. It’s advantage is that there are more sources (people) to add entries so that it can grow and encompass knowledge faster than the small, paid editorial team at EB. But I don’t think it was meant to be the people’s encyclopedia and this is where our tempers run high.
I could think, “I’m being deleted? What do these jerks know about my accomplishments?” and be personally offended and upset by this. But Wikipedia is no measure of my worth. It’s an encyclopedia that is editable and online. Period.
Should there be an encyclopedia of people? Well, there is already. It includes the internet, but extends into phonebooks, government records and personal anecdotes. Maybe we can’t all be written into history like we want to be, but know that this is a century’s old issue: History is not ‘a fact’, it is a point of view. History has been written by a small percentage of the population over time and, because of ’scaling problems’, will probably continue in the same fashion.
What we CAN hope for, though, is the growing understanding of that bias and the ability for our actions that we take TODAY to resonate far into the future: with or without credit, they are important.
View Tara Hunt's profile
13 Comments
Never give another or others the power to define you. That’s up to you.
Funny to see it mentioned here. I’ve always associated Wikipedia with a modern day Animal Farm.
the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit
has become
the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so long as your edit is approved by the real editors
Hi Tara,
you might find this article I wrote when Tony Pierce was deleted from Wikipedia interesting: http://engtech.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/on-wikipedia-blogging-and-the-anti-blog-bias/
Tara — I can’t believe that you *want* to be in there. Think about it. The day I found out I had a wikipedia entry was the day I gained one more thing I have to check regularly to make sure someone hasn’t done an “edit”. I came back one time and found someone had added my birthday, birthplace, and maiden name. Nothing left but my Social Security… Wow — I freaked and had it removed, but I’m sure it’ll appear again and again along with who knows what.
This is nothing but a pain in the ass, Tara. Unfortunately, if you try to ask to have *yourself* deleted, that just ensures they’ll keep you in.
I would be SO relieved if I was marked for deletion and stayed deleted. Trust me. This is stressful, and serves no possible benefit. It’s all downside.
Hey Kathy,
I don’t think I really do want to be in there…but interesting assessment. It’s like all fame. It sounds sexy, but it really is a pain in the ass.
relax Tara .. with entries like:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Robots_of_Robot_Wars
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pee_Wee_Herman
I think you need and deserve a better forum than worrying about the self righteous people who choose to attack you there.
I’d agree with Kathy, except I’m prone to give away personal information about me. I guess if I ever get real notoriety I’ll be more concerned about wierdos tracking me down (like the WIkipedia editors).
Until then I’ll bask in relative obscurity — enough to stay out of sight of the wikipedia delete squad.
Oh, and I think Wikipedia needs to fragment at some point — like Amazon’s done with Endless… it’s nice to have a Walmart World of Data, but I want my own slice of what’s worthy to me to be put into a convenient encyclopaedic volume. I guess that’s what Google’s doing, but heck, I think this need is the future of librarianism.
Well not you can post your deleted article here…
http://wikidumper.blogspot.com/
WikiDumper: The Official Appreciation Page for the Best of the Wikipedia Rejects. “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.” (Edited by Cliff Pickover.)
Tara asks “Should there be an encyclopedia of people?”
I immediately thought that “peoplepedia.com” would be the perfect domain for this. I went there, and there’s a very small (and apparently dormant) biography directory — just 2 entries.
don’t worry, googlepedia will do it soon enough.
holy shit–there really IS something called googlepedia. i was half joking, figuring it wouldn’t take much for google to open up an offshoot pedia based for common search results.
Hmmm… I just realized that my previous comment didn’t post. (that was on topic - and since you now can’t read it - quite brilliant :))
The site took a really really long time to load each page. I tried with and without my OpenID.
Hopefully this comment goes live!
Well, it’s all a bizarre popularity contest, if you ask me. They were going to delete Toronto’s Zanta based on the recommendation from someone in Maine, but the editors kept him in, reportedly, as he fit the criteria for ’street artist’. I guess he had enough fans who wrote in and begged to keep him in on his behalf.
Figure that one out. They keep a guy in who has been banned from Toronto’s downtown by police, but they want to toss a successful business woman.
Yep, that’s a societal comment right there, I think.
One Trackback
[...] press mention that shows my ever being involved in such events - which, unfortunately, seems to be the measuring stick of any sort of notability (which Chris gets to keep due to the fact that he is a “notable developer” - hint: [...]