On 10/1/07, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On 10/1/07, SPUI drspui@gmail.com wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Unclear on how [a subject becomes] "notable" in 60 minutes, unless of course it's being interviewed by Mike Wallace.[1]
Lack of notability is *not* a speedy criterion. Lack of *assertion* of notability is. You can assert notability in 60 minutes quite easily.
Lack of assertion of notability is *not* a speedy criterion. Lack of assertion of *importance* is.
True. But I thought lack of importance wasn't a valid reason for nonspeedy deletion. If so, that's pretty weird.
What is an assertion of notability anyway? "Multiple independent reliable sources discuss Joe"?
What's an assertion of importance? "Joe is important"?
Roughly speaking, you should apply A7 to articles that really have no hope of ever being encyclopaedia articles, or to articles that are so contextless you can't tell if they ever have such home.
"Johnny Nobody is a snowplow driver from Assbackwards, Ontario." should be deleted per A7 "Diunoctquadium is an element that has never existed. It has never been the subject of literature (either peer reviewed or otherwise)." should be deleted per A7 "Russia is a big country in Europe and Asia." should not be deleted per A7
Cheers WilyD