Wikipedia°hard word is committing°hard word suicide°hard word.
Considering the other option°hard word is, largely, to die of LLMs°hard word in 5 years, perhaps this is sensible°hard word.
But it is sad to watch.
----
After Charlie°hard word Kirk°hard word was killed, an editor°hard word quickly created°hard word an article°hard word about his widow°hard word, Erica°hard word Kirk°hard word.
This was, speedily°hard word, nominated°hard word for deletion°hard word.
The discussion remained open for FIVE AND A HALF DAYS, because a few liberals°hard word didn't°hard word like Charlie°hard word Kirk°hard word and wanted to drag°hard word things out because of spite°hard word.
This, obviously, looked bad.
So there is now a discussion about adding a "Wait and See" vote°hard word, to do the sensible°hard word thing of deferring°hard word a discussion in this type of situation.
This is failing°hard word. Because Wikipedia°hard word is committing°hard word suicide°hard word.
There are four main arguments against it, all of which are stupid.
- We should just do whatever°hard word has consensus.
- Articles°hard word that don't°hard word have consensus°hard word to exist should be drafts°hard word.
- People can already vote°hard word how they want.
- We shouldn't°hard word do things because of how Wikipedia°hard word will be perceived°hard word.
----
For years, there has been a small cabal°hard word of editors°hard word who have been at war with the concept°hard word that articles°hard word about Airports should include°hard word data about the destinations°hard word of that airport.
First it was that it was "unsourced°hard word", so people added links°hard word to the airline°hard word route-pages°hard word.
But that is a "primary°hard word" source, and isn't°hard word specific°hard word to each route°hard word. So people added different references°hard word, and more of them.
Then°hard word those references°hard word were also found°hard word to be improper°hard word.
And, the sheer°hard word number of unnecessary°hard word references°hard word became°hard word an issue°hard word.
Because, once again, the fact that this information is very useful°hard word, and not°hard word easily available°hard word elsewhere°hard word, is considered to be a reason NOT to include°hard word it.
----
Clearly, the Hasten°hard word The Day ⚙️ a code-word°hard word for, roughly, "Wikipedia°hard word is bad and we should make it die faster" crowd has won°hard word.