Yeah, there are quite a lot of novel articles (and TV episode articles, I suspect) that are mostly there because someone wrote them and no one else felt strongly enough to try to get them removed from the 'pedia (or because they were written in the days of lower notability standards, and got grandfathered in). It's very difficult to draw conclusions to apply to article Y from reading article X, because as often as not the reason Y is as it is is "because no one noticed before this."
-Fluff
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case < dancase@frontiernet.net> wrote:
On what basis in Clive Cussler notable?
That he’s a regular denizen of the bestseller lists in many countries who’s had works adapted into major motion pictures (To be honest, I think we should say that “all published works by authors who have their paperbacks displayed prominently in the racks near the front of bookstores at airports are notable [image: Smile]“).
Well, I don't know. I had never heard of Cussler before today (don't spend a lot of time in airport bookshops), but I did look at a couple of his novels' Wikipedia articles, and they didn't indicate significance any better than the October article. (One of them had a single, ephemeral reference; the other had 7 that seemed pretty thin.)
I can see how Kathleen would be frustrated by what surely appears from her perspective to be a double standard.
Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
