Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 13:12:41 -0400, Delirium
<delirium(a)hackish.org>
wrote:
Up for deleting [[Joseph Merrick]]? Or is there a
threshold for
"famousness" above which such humanitarian concerns cease to apply?
How many films have been made about Brian Peppers? How many books
written about his life? Is he a prominent member of London society?
Is his skeleton likely to be kept by the medical community and studied
long after his death? What are the chances of his being played by
John Hurt in the film?
The parallel is absurd.
I wasn't claiming they were equivalent. You had suggested that, for
humanitarian reasons, we shouldn't have articles on people notable
solely for deformities or ridicule. I was asking if there's some level
of "notable" above which the notability outweighs those concerns. It
appears from your response that there is---you believe Merrick is
sufficiently notable to outweigh any humanitarian concerns.
I'd say in principle I agree, only I make the judgment of degree
differently in this case. I think Peppers is sufficiently notable,
based on some media coverage and familiarity within academic circles.
There are other people who are less notable than Peppers (people known
only on YTMND and some web forums and nowhere else, for example), and
those people I agree are not worth having articles about.
Therefore, I think your original claim is basically the same as mine: We
shouldn't have articles on people notable solely for deformities or
ridicule, unless they reach some threshold level of notability. We
differ perhaps in both where we'd put the threshold, and where on the
scale we'd put the specific person in question.
-Mark