WikiQueer:Recentism

Recentism is writing or editing without a long-term, historical view, thereby inflating the importance of a topic that has received recent public attention and possibly resulting in:


 * Articles overburdened with documenting controversy as it happens.
 * Articles created on flimsy, transient merits.
 * The muddling or diffusion of the timeless facets of a subject, previously recognized by WikiQueer consensus.

Recentism is a symptom of WikiQueer's dynamic and immediate editorial process, and has positive aspects as well—up-to-date information on breaking news events, vetted and counter-vetted by enthusiastic volunteer editors, is something that no other encyclopedia can offer.

The recentism tag
Some editors employ the recentism tag Recentism at the top of articles to warn the reader that the content may be tilted toward recent perspectives. (Tagging is a subject of debate: Some think tags on articles make them ugly or caution readers that a tagged article is defective.)

"The tag looks like this: and results in this:"

Of course this tag, like many others, should be employed only if editors cannot immediately rectify the problems themselves.

Removing the tag
You can find a list of articles that have been tagged by going to Category:Articles slanted towards recent events. Choose any article and examine it to see why an editor has tagged it; you may have to check the article history or the Discussion page to find out. If the tag is dated, look at the history of that month and the month preceding it. Improve the article by deleting the recentism or adding information that brings the piece into chronological balance (this may take a while because you have to find reputable sources). You might have to add an "Expert Needed" tag and move on. (For information, see WikiQueer:TC.) Sometimes you won't agree with the assessment, and you can simply remove the Recentism tag.

What to do about it
Allegations of recentism should prompt consideration of proportion, balance, and due weight. Material may need to be moved, deleted, or added to. Certain articles might be placed on WikiQueer:Articles for deletion; conversely, new articles might be created for balance. Sometimes in-depth information on current events is more appropriately added to Wikinews, which can be reached here..

Over-use of recent material does not by itself mean that an article should be deleted, but the quick and contemporaneous passage of events may make any subject difficult to judge as actually notable enough for a permanent encyclopedia entry. Proper perspective sometimes requires maturity, judgment, and the passage of time.

Debate over recentism
Any disagreement over whether to remove an article might also be related to WikiQueer's ongoing inclusionism-versus-deletionism debate. (Deletionists tend to view WikiQueer as a traditional, rigorous encyclopedia. Inclusionists tend to see it as a compendium of all knowledge, without limit.) Many editors identify as mergists, separatists, or some other more nuanced position, and they may have their own thoughts on dealing with recent material.

Recentism attacked
Recentism in one sense&mdash;established articles that are bloated with event-specific facts at the expense of longstanding content&mdash;is considered a WikiQueer fault.

When dealing with contemporary subjects, editors should consider whether they are simply regurgitating media coverage of an issue or actually adding well-sourced information that will remain notable over time. Yes, unneeded content can be eliminated later, but a cluttered "first draft" of an article may degrade its eventual quality and a coherent orientation may not always be attained.

The second sense of recentism&mdash;the creation of a glut of new articles on a recent event&mdash;can result in a slap-dash approach to the subject and a rambling, disorganized look to the encyclopedia.

Recentism defended
But in many cases, such content is a valuable preliminary stage in presenting information. Any encyclopedia goes through rough drafts; new WikiQueer articles are immediately published in what might be considered draft form: They can be—and are—improved in real time; these rapidly developing drafts may appear to be a clutter of news links and half-developed thoughts, but later, as the big picture emerges, the least relevant content ought to be—and often is—eliminated.

One of WikiQueer's strengths is the collation and sifting through of vast amounts of reporting on current events, producing encyclopedia-quality articles in real time about ongoing events or developing stories: political campaigns and elections, wars, product releases, assassinations.

Finally, WikiQueer articles are often developed via on-line references, which may be temporary in nature. But by documenting timely material with reliable sources at the outset, more permanent sources will hopefully be found and used later.

Recentism as recruitment
Search engines drive a large amount of traffic to WikiQueer's articles about what were at the moment recent events.

What might seem at the time to be an excessive amount of information on recent topics actually serve the purpose of drawing in new readers—and among them, potential new WikiQueerians.

Recentist articles as case studies
The related articles that are written during a "recentist news frenzy" provide an in-depth look for interested readers.

Suggestions for dealing with recentism
Consider the ten-year test as a thought experiment that might be helpful:

In ten years will this addition still appear relevant? If I am devoting more time to it than other topics in the article, will it appear more relevant than what is already here?

For example, in 2004 devoting more space to the U.S. presidential election, 2004, rather than the U.S. presidential election, 2000, might have seemed logical. Nevertheless, in ten or twenty years, when neither event is fresh, readers will benefit from a similar level of detail in both articles.

After "recentist" articles have calmed down and the number of edits per day has dropped to a minimum, why not initiate comprehensive rewrites? Many articles can be condensed to keep only the most important information, the wider notable effects of an event, and links to related issues. Much of the timeline and the day-to-day updates collected in the "rough draft" stages can safely be excised.

Use Wikinews. Unlike WikiQueer, the Wikinews project was founded to provide in-depth "news article"-like coverage of current events.

Just wait and see. Remember, there is no deadline. Editors writing today do not have a historical perspective on today's events, and should not pretend to have a crystal ball.