In Defense of Inclusionism
Every year something in my brain breaks and I think "I know, I'll finally get rsync.net a wikipedia entry".<p>This is somewhat important because the little-hitler that owns (yes, owns) the "cloud storage" wikipedia page refuses all additions of cloud storage providers that "aren't notable".  So therefore, rsync.net has to have a wikipedia page.<p>This shouldn't be a problem - rsync.net has been mentioned in the press widely over the course of over 10 years - everything from articles about our warrant canary to articles about our ZFS support.  In fact, <i>other wikipedia pages</i> mention and discuss rsync.net.<p>You know where this is going.<p>A perfectly well written article, well cited with 15+ citations from "respectable" journalist sources is <i>nearly insta-deleted</i> due to notability.<p>Every single time.  I've tried 4-5 times over the past few years.  Every time it's a different little-hitler that swoops in to bravely defend wikipedia.