Anthony DiPierro wrote:
On 5/26/06, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
When we choose to publish facts on private people versus public people, for example, is a judgment call about how "notable" they are---not anything to do with verifiability, as many private/non-notable people have information about them verifiable from e.g. phone books.
Actually, I'd dispute that a phone book is a reliable source. It's pretty easy to get fake information into a phone book. Also I'd say there usually isn't enough information in a phone book to uniquely identify a person anyway.
I'd go so far as to say phone books are completely excludable as Wikipedia sources, regardless of whether the information is on a public or private person, famous or average, "notable" or "non-notable".
While I acknowledge that most phone book information has very limited value, but it is easy to imagine situations where that would not be the case.
Ec