| Revision as of 18:51, 6 December 2004 view source152.17.56.197 (talk) Note that sometimes they're moved to the user page.← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:48, 12 December 2004 view source EventHorizon (talk | contribs)717 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| A '''vanity page''' is a type of Misplaced Pages article usually submitted for ]. While "vanity page" is an amorphous construct and it's difficult to develop explicit criteria for diagnosis, normally the intent of the writer can be inferred by the tone of the article. | |||
| Wikipedians use the term "vanity" to mean many different things. This page describes one of them. It is by no means meant to be an official definition. | |||
| Usually, vanity authors write about themselves, their significant others, or their ]s. Articles about start-up businesses or musicians are acceptable, while it's preferable that the initial author not be someone affiliated with the project. | |||
| A '''vanity page''' is a sort of page created by a Misplaced Pages user, usually about himself or his associates, afflicted with many problems: | |||
| == Example vanity article == | |||
| #The subject matter is not well-known enough for there to be multiple contributors. While fame shouldn't necessarily be a condition for inclusion, if a page is doomed eternally to be a one-editor page, it ought to be yanked. | |||
| #Often reading like local newspapers' feature articles, vanity pages are usually highly POV and non-encyclopedic. | |||
| #Such pages are usually poorly written. | |||
| #Vanity pages almost always lack interesting content. "Bob Publicas was born on April 6, 1969 and is a toilet repairman" is highly interesting to Mr. Publicas, but not to anyone else. | |||
| #These pages, often experimental, are usually written by people unfamiliar with Misplaced Pages and its content standards. | |||
| #Finally, these pages rarely perform a function that cannot be achieved with a ]. | |||
| '''Joe Blow''' is a 31-year-old ] from ]. His hobbies include ] and ], and he's currently single. His childhood dream was of being an ], but now he dreams of being a ]. | |||
| A vanity page need not be a page an individual writes about him- or herself. A page dedicated to a girlfriend, a family pet, or a social group at a high school can also be a vanity page. | |||
| Nothing against Mr. Blow, the page just isn't very interesting. It doesn't describe notable work he has done, or why an article about him should exist in the first place. Furthermore, even the unrealized aspirations, thoughts, and hobbies of decidedly ''famous'' people are not considered encyclopedic enough for inclusion, unless they are directly salient to the person's public life and, preferably, verifiable. | |||
| ⚫ | ==Policy regarding vanity pages== | ||
| ==Does lack of fame a vanity article make?== | |||
| ⚫ | Vanity pages are usually sent to ]. Deletion of the page normally ensues, although sometimes it may be moved to the user's user-page. Even famous Wikipedians have had pages about them judged to be vanity pages and deleted. | ||
| ⚫ | A page should not be cast away as "vanity" simply because the subject is not famous. There is presently no consensus about what degree of recognition is required for a page to be included in Misplaced Pages, and therefore, lack of fame should be completely ignored in deletion debates. | ||
| ⚫ | If you judge an article to be a vanity page, and thus prone to the problems associated with such pages, you |
||
| Furthermore, it should be noted that an article is not a "vanity" page simply because it was written by its subject. Articles about existing books, movies, games, and businesses are not "vanity" so long as the content is kept to salient material and not overtly promotional. | |||
| ⚫ | The user who created the page is probably a new user. If there is nothing particularly offensive about the page, please be kind to the ]. Often, during deletion debates for vanity pages, disparaging comments fly about the subject of the page |
||
| == |
== Problems with vanity pages == | ||
| The most significant problem with vanity pages is that they often discuss subjects that are not well-enough known for there to be multiple editors. Additionally, they are often "experimental" pages to which the author never returns. The quality of a Misplaced Pages article is often presumed to be proportional to the number of edits, so if an article is doomed to be a one-edit page, it should be deleted. | |||
| ⚫ | The term '''encyclopædia''' derives from ] ] |
||
| In some cases, Misplaced Pages users write articles about themselves when the more apporpriate action would be to create a ]. In these cases, the article is normally moved rather than deleted. | |||
| An encyclopaedia is not a forum for self-promotion or advertising. For anyone who really wants to get him- or herself into print, there are a number of organizations, some respectable and some not, that will publish documents. Misplaced Pages is not, nor does it aspire to be, a ''']'''. | |||
| ⚫ | ==Policy regarding vanity pages== | ||
| ''See also'': ] | |||
| ⚫ | Vanity pages are usually sent to ]. Deletion of the page normally ensues, although sometimes it may be moved to the user's user-page. Even famous Wikipedians have had pages about them judged to be vanity pages and deleted. | ||
| ⚫ | If you judge an article to be a vanity page, and thus prone to the problems associated with such pages, you should request its deletion. | ||
| ⚫ | The user who created the page is probably a new user. If there is nothing particularly offensive about the page, please be kind to the ]. Often, during deletion debates for vanity pages, disparaging comments fly about the subject of the page/author (often presumed to be the same person) and the author's motives. These comments border on personal attacks, and may discourage the page's creator from future contributions. Remember to ]. | ||
| Usually, vanity articles are not recreated after deleted. It is believed that the majority of vanity page creators forget about their vanity pages and do not revisit at all; this is evident in that they rarely defend the article during the deletion debate. | |||
| ⚫ | ==Misplaced Pages is not a vanity press== | ||
| ⚫ | The term '''encyclopædia''' derives from ] ] and means, roughly, a course of general education (from Greek εγκυκλιος ("general") + παιδεια ("knowledge"). As Misplaced Pages is, or at least aspires to be, an encyclopædia, it should contain only material that some definable group of people might want to know. | ||
| ⚫ | == |
||
| Misplaced Pages is not, therefore, a forum for advertising or a ]. For these purposes, it is probably not even effective: while Misplaced Pages's articles on famous topics are heavily trafficked, those on obscure topics are not. | |||
| ⚫ | A page should not be cast away as "vanity" simply |
||
| See also: ] | See also: ] | ||
Revision as of 04:48, 12 December 2004
A vanity page is a type of Misplaced Pages article usually submitted for deletion. While "vanity page" is an amorphous construct and it's difficult to develop explicit criteria for diagnosis, normally the intent of the writer can be inferred by the tone of the article.
Usually, vanity authors write about themselves, their significant others, or their high schools. Articles about start-up businesses or musicians are acceptable, while it's preferable that the initial author not be someone affiliated with the project.
Example vanity article
Joe Blow is a 31-year-old actuary from Seattle, Washington. His hobbies include golf and poker, and he's currently single. His childhood dream was of being an astronaut, but now he dreams of being a novelist.
Nothing against Mr. Blow, the page just isn't very interesting. It doesn't describe notable work he has done, or why an article about him should exist in the first place. Furthermore, even the unrealized aspirations, thoughts, and hobbies of decidedly famous people are not considered encyclopedic enough for inclusion, unless they are directly salient to the person's public life and, preferably, verifiable.
Does lack of fame a vanity article make?
A page should not be cast away as "vanity" simply because the subject is not famous. There is presently no consensus about what degree of recognition is required for a page to be included in Misplaced Pages, and therefore, lack of fame should be completely ignored in deletion debates.
Furthermore, it should be noted that an article is not a "vanity" page simply because it was written by its subject. Articles about existing books, movies, games, and businesses are not "vanity" so long as the content is kept to salient material and not overtly promotional.
Problems with vanity pages
The most significant problem with vanity pages is that they often discuss subjects that are not well-enough known for there to be multiple editors. Additionally, they are often "experimental" pages to which the author never returns. The quality of a Misplaced Pages article is often presumed to be proportional to the number of edits, so if an article is doomed to be a one-edit page, it should be deleted.
In some cases, Misplaced Pages users write articles about themselves when the more apporpriate action would be to create a user page. In these cases, the article is normally moved rather than deleted.
Policy regarding vanity pages
Vanity pages are usually sent to Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion. Deletion of the page normally ensues, although sometimes it may be moved to the user's user-page. Even famous Wikipedians have had pages about them judged to be vanity pages and deleted.
If you judge an article to be a vanity page, and thus prone to the problems associated with such pages, you should request its deletion.
The user who created the page is probably a new user. If there is nothing particularly offensive about the page, please be kind to the newbie. Often, during deletion debates for vanity pages, disparaging comments fly about the subject of the page/author (often presumed to be the same person) and the author's motives. These comments border on personal attacks, and may discourage the page's creator from future contributions. Remember to assume good faith.
Usually, vanity articles are not recreated after deleted. It is believed that the majority of vanity page creators forget about their vanity pages and do not revisit at all; this is evident in that they rarely defend the article during the deletion debate.
Misplaced Pages is not a vanity press
The term encyclopædia derives from Medieval Latin and means, roughly, a course of general education (from Greek εγκυκλιος ("general") + παιδεια ("knowledge"). As Misplaced Pages is, or at least aspires to be, an encyclopædia, it should contain only material that some definable group of people might want to know.
Misplaced Pages is not, therefore, a forum for advertising or a vanity press. For these purposes, it is probably not even effective: while Misplaced Pages's articles on famous topics are heavily trafficked, those on obscure topics are not.
See also: Misplaced Pages:Auto-biography