Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence/Workshop: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 694:
::* having an article that must be read as a precursor for another article to be comprehensible seems a poor precedent to set. Does WP even have navigation templates to inform readers that article X is necessary background reading for article Y? Wikilinks for when a reader seeks additional information are fine, but necessary background seems to me to be an implicit part of an article, not something to restrict to a parent article
::Unless there is way too much material for a sensibly sized but still thorough article on [[Group differences and intelligence]] then my gut instinct is that keeping material together in a single article with the race issues kept as a small part is a preferable way forward. [[User:EdChem|EdChem]] ([[User talk:EdChem|talk]]) 13:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
:::Thanks for these comments. All the above points are reasonable. If any arbitrator expressed an interest in this idea, I would be happy to provide a point-by-point commentary, but my sense is that none are. The key point is that "there is way too much material for a sensibly sized but still thorough article." Just as we had to (and it was a good thing that we did) make [[History of the race and intelligence controversy]] a daughter article, we will need to do that for other material as well. The only question is if this process will occur under Arb Com's supervision. I think it should. [[User:David.Kane|David.Kane]] ([[User talk:David.Kane|talk]]) 23:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
==Proposals by User:Rvcx==
| |||