On Dec 21, 2007 1:07 PM, David Gerard
<dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That sounds like an excellent argument for
trashing the "notability"
guideline, which has always been deeply problematic, particularly for
its subjectivity.
Wholly agreed.
Additionally, most such articles exist as break-outs from an article
that nobody is arguing should be deleted. Breaking out detail that
would make the primary article unwieldy is a long accepted Wikipedia
practise.
Remember that the Wikipedia jargon word
"notability" originated as a
back-formation from "non-notable," which was Votes For Deletion jargon
for "I don't like it." And that's about all it still is.
Notability is the attempt to provide solid rules for deletion because
of the criticism that 'non-notable' is subjective. However,
consistent subjectivity is still subjective, no matter how consistent
it is.
Notability is also not well derived from core policy, IMO.
-Matt
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
"If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic,
Wikipedia should not have an article on it."
Last I checked, verifiability is core policy, and that's from it. Sounds
like a reasonable derivation to me.