On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 05:09:34PM +0100, Owen McKnight wrote:
Janet McKnight janetmck@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
There are lots of pages about the City and the University about non-geo-locateable things which are probably adequately covered by Wikipedia, e.g.:
http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Oxford_University http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Chancellor http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Convocation http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Professor_Of_Poetry http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Oxford_Martyrs http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Civil_War
I feel really mean saying "this stuff should go!" when someone has put lots of effort into it, but I think it's not really sensibly within scope (& there are better places for it).
I'm happy for all of that to go, precisely because Wikipedia covers it all far better than the Open Guide ever will. I think they're all arguably within scope, but our efforts would be better concentrated on content that isn't available elsewhere, much of which Wikipedia would consider too trivial to be notable. Shops, venues, parks, schools...
Question: Is there anything appropriate for the Open Guide that doesn't have a geographical location?
I would rather not strip the Oxford Guide of non-geotagged content. It's true that wikipedia may cover some subjects in more detail, or better, than we are, but there's room for both.