I'm Not Notable
Don't go searching for the Wikipedia page on Fred Wilson the venture capitalist (ie me) because it won't be there. It was deleted for "non notability".
You'll find a guy named Fred Wilson who was a politician in Ontario Canada briefly from 1990 to 1995. But you won't find Fred Wilson, the well known artist. Or Fred Wilson, the rock band from LA. Or Fred Wilson, the chessmaster. Or me.
It was a good entry, but now it's gone.
Wow. Wisdom of crowds and all that, eh? Unbelievable.
Posted by: scott partee | June 20, 2006 at 06:50 AM
(start saracsm) Well that certainly makes Wikipedia a more valuable resource (end sarcasm)
They're cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Posted by: Erik Schwartz | June 20, 2006 at 06:59 AM
Not bitter!
Posted by: Rick Stratton | June 20, 2006 at 08:30 AM
Someone should create a USV page!
Mayfield has one...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayfield_Fund
Posted by: Charlie | June 20, 2006 at 09:13 AM
Welcome back to the great unwashed (and un-Wikipedia-worthy) masses!
Posted by: Greg | June 20, 2006 at 09:23 AM
Well that's lame... Since when should notability be used to dictate wikipedia entries? A new scientific term isn't neccesarily notable, but give it time.
In the business world, quite a few people (particularly in recent startups) know who Fred Wilson (the VC) is... I have yet to meet someone who knows who Fred Wilson (the politician) is.
Posted by: Robert Dewey | June 20, 2006 at 10:09 AM
Wikipedia and it's users are poorer for the decision of the "crowds".
Posted by: Michael Parekh | June 20, 2006 at 10:22 AM
maybe its time for a who's who type of wiki which individuals are encouraged to make. But then again I guess that is what a personal blog approximates too.
Posted by: Geoff | June 20, 2006 at 11:12 AM
Nothing a seven state bank robbing spree won't fix.....
Posted by: jackson | June 20, 2006 at 12:24 PM
In the past I have considered creating some resources on Wikipedia that would cover my speciality in computer performance and capacity planning. I've written books on the subject, have lots of hits on my name if you google it, but hearing about arbitrary decisions like this makes me feel that its not worth the effort. It doesn't feel right that Wikipedia should promote itself at the start as the place where anyone can create and share useful reference information, and then have arbitrary restrictions be placed on who and what can be described there. Its now a bureacracy that I don't want to deal with. However, the Internet has always "routed around censorship", so if someone sets up a new Wiki based on the original principles of Wikipedia, to hold all the things that the bureaucrats are rejecting, I'll support it....
Posted by: Adrian Cockcroft | June 20, 2006 at 12:46 PM
Let's see what they do with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_VC
Posted by: Tom W. | June 20, 2006 at 01:10 PM
I guess one has to die to become notable. Michael Bartosh had a page constructed the day after he fell off a balcony to his sudden death. There was a similar discussion about his page being deleted for notability. His was "voted" to stay.
Posted by: Dave | June 20, 2006 at 01:28 PM
It's not worth the agony, after getting listed some time ago my entry has been editied and cross edited so many time that the viable information is no longer there. The edit Nazis are terrible and I have given up completly on the Wikipedia
Posted by: Todd Cochrane | June 20, 2006 at 03:28 PM
I'm sorry, I don't often read you, thus I don't know you at all... but is this you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Wilson_%28Blogger%29
Posted by: mlq | June 20, 2006 at 03:45 PM
Are you referring to the removal of the note within the Fred Wilson (Historical Ontario MPPs) entry?
"Note: Fred Wilson is also a high-profile venture capitalist who founded Flatiron Partners and Union Square Ventures. Flatiron Partners invested in Geocities and Kozmo, and Union Square invested in the social bookmarking site [[Delicious]]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fred_Wilson&diff=54660007&oldid=54654654
Or was there a more complete entry?
It is Wikipedia - you have the power - add it again and provide reference to the list of blog entries refuting your claimed "non notablity"!
Posted by: Derek | June 20, 2006 at 03:50 PM
update: well it looks like someone else has (re)added an entry for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Wilson_(Blogger).
Thanks to Tomwatson62 and Stevenscollege
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fred_Wilson_(Blogger)&action=history
Now Wikipedia just needs a disambiguation page to ensure you are not mistaken for a Historical Ontario MPP..
Posted by: Derek | June 20, 2006 at 04:05 PM
Sorry for no knowing you, but you say you deserve a Wikipedia page because what?
Posted by: edddy | June 20, 2006 at 04:31 PM
Why not get to the heart of the matter? The criteria for including people in Wikipedia based on their notability are here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28people%29
Posted by: Darren | June 20, 2006 at 05:10 PM
Did you check on the credentials of those who voted for deletion... and were some of them pre-teens or self-described slacker geniuses?
Posted by: csven | June 20, 2006 at 08:31 PM
Fred, are you protesting the that you are notable enough to be included but were unfairly excluded, that the notoriety standard is applied inconsistently and cluelessly, or that wikipedia should lower its standard to include less notable people?
Or simply shedding light on Wikipedia's process? I had the impression you were interested in exploring the inner workings and edges of the process. Perhaps this post is not a protest after all, but simply a statement of fact.
(It was hard to resist making a snide comment about VC egos on this one, but I managed it)
Posted by: Parand | June 20, 2006 at 10:28 PM
I got kicked off Wikipedia too. Their whole definition of “notable” is a relic of limited-space paper encyclopedias, incompatible with Long Tail thinking.
Posted by: Mike Abundo | June 20, 2006 at 10:38 PM
What is that AJAX tool tip that pops up when you hover the icon over a link on your blog - that tells how many times the link was clicked today?
Posted by: Search Engines WEB | June 20, 2006 at 11:33 PM
Fred, I don't know you, so I cannot comment on whether or not you should have a Wikipedia page. And, I am sorry to say, reading the re-added Wikipedia page doesn't really sound too notable to me. No offense. For starters the "controvery" is taking up as much space as the information about you. If that is what makes you notable, then, sorry, you're not.
Now, to respond to some of the other comments: while Wikipedia doesn't have a limited "space" ressource, they have a limited policing ressource. If everybody were allowed a Wikipedia page then Wikipedia would suddenly get a whole lot of them. Let's not even think about the 15 year old kids who heard of Wikipedia and who'll want to show off to their fellow kids; I'm sure that the average geek has delusions of grandeur. How should Wikipedia verify anything but the most outrageous claims?
As much as I'd love to have a ressource that reliably described every human being on Earth, Wikipedia isn't going to be it.
If you have to be on Wikipedia - create a userpage.
Posted by: Nils | June 21, 2006 at 12:44 AM
i see it a little differently.
With Blogs and comments, yoou have your own historogram and wikipedia adds no value to your brand. The blog lasts just as long as do the comments.
At least the Heat won! Did you double down when they were down 2-0 - NOT
Posted by: howard Lindzon | June 21, 2006 at 12:52 AM
I have no idea who you are so yeah, off you go.
Posted by: Eric the Red | June 21, 2006 at 05:10 AM