Talk:Shuttleworth Foundation

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Open (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OpenWikipedia:WikiProject OpenTemplate:WikiProject OpenOpen articles

NPOV tag

I'm going to remove the tag because whoever tagged the article didn't say why they did so here, rendering it useless. Theshibboleth 18:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's useless is to remove an NPOV tag without a good reason (the article does have severe NPOV issues). Please don't do that again. You need to read an article and then conclude that the NPOV tag shouldn't be there. Just because whoever added it didn't write down a reason doesn't mean that it's good practice to just plain remove it. —msikma (user, talk) 14:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite required

This article needs to be rewritten. It seems like an advertisement at this point, and I don't think that simply patching it up is going to help it very easily. The new version will first have to assert notability, then go on to explain the circumstances under which the foundation was created and the events leading up to that point, as well as a history of its existence, and then state some information on the things the foundation does. —msikma (user, talk) 14:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the rewrite accomplishes most of this (not all, it could still be improved, I'm keeping a note of that)80.187.201.11 (talk) 09:22, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restore content deleted as non-notable

This page contained a full list of Shuttleworth Foundation fellows. This list was deleted as "non-notable people".

Notability guidelines in Wikipedia apply to pages, but not to the content within them. (Notability guidelines can also apply to the content of lists, but this is for cases where the page *is* a list – this is not one of those cases.)

I've raised this concern on the editor's talk page. I'm leaving a note here as well. I have conflict of interest, but if there's no response here I plan to revert this deletion one week from now. I hope that's okay.

Madeleine ✉ ✍ 21:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Madeleine, thanks for raising the discussion here. While you are correct about WP:NNC, it's also worth pointing out that lists are noted as an exception to this and WP:LISTN talks about whether a group or set of things (or in this case people) is notable enough for a stand alone list, or whether lists should be limited only to notable people.

In this case, I would argue that it has not been demonstrated that being a fellow of this foundation has been demonstrated in and of itself has been demonstrated to be notable (i.e. that the group is notable), and so simply copying the names of everyone who has been a fellow from the foundation's website (which is where nearly all names were sourced from) verges on promotional.

One option would be to do what many articles do which is have a list of "notable" fellows, and then list those people who have been fellows who are otherwise notable enough for a wikipedia article. This is the most common practice I've seen on wikipedia. However, this article already names some notable fellows in the lead so that would be duplicating that (I'd be happy with moving those names from the lead to a list of notable fellows later in the article - I'm not sure they belong in the lead anyway). It would be good to hear what other independent editors think. Thanks Melcous (talk) 22:26, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Melcous, WP:LISTN refers to stand-alone lists: e.g. List of unusual drainage systems. (A recent favorite of mine.) This article does not appear to be a stand-alone list.

You seem to have removed a list from within an article that is *not* a stand-alone list. As I read it, WP:LISTN guideline is stand-alone lists. Not whether a list should exist within an article that is not a stand-alone list.

(I'm going to skip any discussion about notability. I'm trying to point out to you that – as far as I can tell – notability guidelines are irrelevant and don't appear to justify the deletion.)

Madeleine ✉ ✍ 13:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]