[Wikipedia-l] Notability changes from Jimbo's view

[Steve]

Some things are not so cut-and-dry. For example, take this former
article on 'Userpic':

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Userpic&oldid=67561422

Deleted for reasons of varifiability. Now, if you are a MySpace user
you know full and well that this article is complete and factual to
the T. However, its not "verifiable" because:

a) no research or media exists which catalogues the facts contained

b) being simply a MySpace user doesn't give your contribution any
weight. You will be charged with conducting "original research".

-S

On 3/11/07, daniwo59 at aol.com <daniwo59 at aol.com> wrote:
>
> No, Verifiability has never been the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia.
> Every branch of McDonalds can be verified by looking them up in phonebooks--that
>  does not mean that they are notable and should be included. If anything the
> criteria for notability have eroded somewhat, so that topics that would have
> been deleted on sight are included as a matter of course.
>
> Danny
>
> In a message dated 3/11/2007 9:20:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> it at knowledge.co.uk writes:
>
> In the  old days, Jimbo described "Verifiability" as the criteria for
> inclusion in  Wikipedia, and this was endorsed by the description of
> "Notability".
>
> Not any more. "Notability" has been redefined as  equating
> to:  worthiness, "attracting attention", supported by  secondary
> sources, popularity, consensus, or perceived truth.
>
> And  articles that are not considered "note-worthy", or balderdash,
> are now  deleted, rather than described as such.
>
> Is this what Jimbo  wants?
>
> Regards,
> Ian Tresman
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free
> email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at
> http://www.aol.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>