Ian Woollard wrote:
On 24/11/2007, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote: But notability and verifiability are, sadly, not synonymous in
their usage on Wikipedia. I think they should be but therein lies the great conflict of our time.
No, I absolutely don't think so. Just because something is verifiably true, doesn't mean it should go in the wikipedia. Plenty of things are unencyclopedic.
But you're not me, and therefore can have different opinions. Hence the conflict.
Even accepting that "notability" is going to be with us for the
forseeable future, though, I think it's a bad idea to be applying it widely on a sub-article level. We want our biography articles to contain peoples' dates of birth, for example, but in very few cases is that date of birth a "notable" fact. Simply a verifiable one.
On the contrary, I find that it's a notable fact if somebody significant noted it, and that usually happens with a birthdate if the biography is that of a significant person.
I see extremely few citations for birthdates in Wikipedia. They usually only show up when some pedant is using WP:V as a blunt instrument for other reasons, or in a few rare cases when there actually is some sort of significance to the person's birth date.