[WikiEN-l] Re: Notability meta-guidelines

[geni]

On 1/19/06, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18/01/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >On what basis do you make this particular claim?
> >
> > Ok I was definitely unclear :) I am trying to find the rationale behind
> > people's revulsion of "fancruft". I don't see the derogatory word
> > "cruft" used to describe any subject on wikipedia, no matter how
> > esoteric, that is based on the physical world.
>
> Classic counterexample: nominating a handful of articles on *physical
> elements* as "sciencecruft".
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk

are we talking about physical elements that are know to exist or ones
that are subject to speculation in only a couple of papers?

--
geni