Essentialism

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Community
Anti-wiki
Conflict-driven view
False community
Wikiculture
Wikifaith
The Wiki process
Darwikinism
Power structure
Wikianarchism
Wikibureaucracy
Wikidemocratism
WikiDemocracy
Wikidespotism
Wikifederalism
Wikihierarchism
Wikimeritocracy
Wikimobocracy
Wikindividualism
Wikioligarchism
Wikiplutocracy
Wikirepublicanism
Wikiscepticism
Wikitechnocracy
Collaboration
Antifactionalism
Factionalism
Social
Exopedianism
Mesopedianism
Metapedianism
Overall content structure
Transclusionism
Antitransclusionism
Categorism
Structurism
Encyclopedia standards
Deletionism
Delusionism
Exclusionism
Inclusionism
Precisionism
Notability
Essentialism
Incrementalism
Article length
Mergism
Separatism
Measuring accuracy
Eventualism
Immediatism
Miscellaneous
Antiovertranswikism
Mediawikianism
Post-Deletionism
Transwikism
Wikidynamism
Wikisecessionism
Redirectionism

Essentialism is a philosophy held by Wikipedians who think that the arguments over notability are especially silly given that there's so much left to do on the big general articles for which a consensus exists that they are essential. Essentialists believe that Wikipedia is not paper, but an encyclopedia, and that does mean that not everything qualifies for inclusion, regardless of space limitations or lack thereof. Therefore, its role is to cover topics which are not only encyclopedic but also notable and verifiable, and if that means that Wikipedia isn't the first to cover a topic, that's actually probably a good thing - one shouldn't have to question the value of inclusion of the content.

They believe that the wiki concept was meant not only to be able to do everything that a paper encyclopedia does but also expand on it, but that being said, there are always going to be parameters. Essentialists believe the main reason for Wikipedia 1.0 is because it's become largely apparent that enough energy has been spent on breadth, perhaps at the expense of depth within the articles which are clearly the core topics. They think that the deletion/inclusion divide should be forgotten until there's less to do on the basics.

They are odd cousins to the incrementalism school, and probably closely related to the exopedianism school.