"
On 17 June 2014 03:41, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, there seem to be some cognitive dissonance going on here, it's
>> weird.
>
> Andy wants an item about himself.

I want policy, particularly the notability policy, to be applied
consistently and honestly.

>'The Community' said 'no, not yet'.

Not so. There was no emerging consensus before the item was deleted;
and further on-Wikidata discussion effectively prohibited.

> Andy regularly raises this as an inconsistency.

I do? "Regularly?" Where? When?

> Items for contributors is a special-case problem that the community needs to
> solve with a focused RFC,

Is it? We have items for other contributors; there is no policy
prohibiting them,.

> but maybe now isnt the right time,

I raised the issue of notability; not a specific item, because it
seemed apposite to the then-current discussion. (I responded to the
comment "It is even said in the notability criteria that if we can

clearly identify the concept, like with an id in some authority or

national database, then it is notable." With evidence of a counter
view being applied; it soon became clear that I'm not the only person
to have observed this.

It is you who has instead chosen to make it about the specific case.

> and raising it in every discussion that touches on notability is not helpful.

"every discussion..."?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l