On 24 Sep 2006, at 14:37, geni wrote:
On 9/24/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
If you can come up with a notability policy that follows obviously and elegantly from the one-sentence summaries of NPOV, NOR and V [*], then it'll definitely fly. If not, it's unlikely to.
- d.
How about:
For an article to exist there must be enough independent verifiable sources to make it posible to write it in a NPOV form.
This is good (apart from the typo).
I wonder if we should drop the pretence that articles are either "good" or "poor", and instead have a metric for how good we can expect them to be.
I would base this on the number of independent editors who have edited the article in the last year, and the number of sources cited. We could also include the number of people who have read the article and the number of active editors who have it watchlisted.