From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Cutting the list down
Is all of this really necessary? I think an article detailing the Res College system would be useful, we could merge the articles on CRC/Jones/Willard etc into it. But this just looks like a long and mostly pointless list. Bolt Vanderhuge 05:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- The short answer is yes. A list is not an article, which is obviously why there are camps of wikipedians who would like to do away with them altogether. Nevertheless, going off of WP:WIAFL as something to aspire for, I aim first for comprehensiveness and factual accuracy followed second by massaging the style and formatting to make the list useful and well-constructed. My philosophy/penchant for list-making (of residences, buildings, faculty, etc.) is grounded in the fact that a list, unlike a "prose" article, can be comprehensive/exhaustive without requiring intimate familiarity with the subject in order for a reader/editor to be able to understand or contribute.
- It's always my hope (however unlikely), that a novice reader/editor might come across an essentially blank framework like this and begin to fill in the blanks rather than being discouraged after his/her stubby contribution is speedily AfDed somewhere else. In that way a list is perfect for these types of articles that I don't see how they could expand much beyond a couple of lines for each of history, architecture, governance, traditions, and notable alumni. As you mentioned, the CRC/Jones/Willard seem to have stubby articles just floating around in the wikiverse and should likely be AfDed, to say nothing of the other colleges/halls that are not even covered -- but taken together, were each of these entries filled in, it makes for a richer tapestry (see List of MIT undergraduate dormitories). Obviously they accumulate cruft, POV, and OR, but hey, at least it's all in one place. Madcoverboy 06:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
