My real name is also Per Abrahamsen.
My real name is also Per Abrahamsen.
You go to the Encyclopedia when you get curious about some subject during your daily life, typically in casual conversations, but it could also be a tangential subject related you stumble on during your work, or while reading a newspaper or a book.
An Encyclopedia is a collection of trivia. For non-trivia, go to Web of science or (less cutting-edge) in-depths books about the subject. All an Encyclopedia can do is to skim the subject, thus reducing it to trivia. Thus, trivia sections are fine, if somewhat redundant. They would in general better be rewritten to be part of the main text, rather than be at list form. The {{Trivia}} template is bad though. It is usually obvious that a section is list form Trivia, and thus add nothing of value to the reader.
The only useful criteria for the importance of a topic is how likely someone is to look it up. Anything else will be POV. However, the notability criteria shouldn't really be based on the importance of the topic, but on the likelihood that multiple competent editors will contribute to the article. If there is only one competent contributor, it is not really a wiki, but mote like a personal soap-box or blog. Wikipedia only shines when multiple competent editors can correct each others mistakes.
Note that this notability criteria is fluid, it depends on who contributes to Wikipedia. And it is not very practical, so more heuristic guidelines will still be needed.
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.