If you want a higher level, 90% of the present members of the US National Academy of Engineering do not have articles.
"More than one thing" seems a weird standard, in my opinion. An athlete wouldnt be notable unless also a movie star? But perhaps you mean elected twice to their legislature? I do not consider myself an extreme inclusionist. I for example do not support the inclusion of members of most city councils, or local school boards.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Ian Woollard ian.woollard@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/03/2010, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
Even for the US, about 80% of the members of state legislatures historically are not covered. For the current Michigan House of Representatives, only 50% of the current members have articles, and almost none of the earlier ones. this is very low-lying fruit, well within the reach of any beginner.
There's the question as to how notable they really are; would you ever get significant coverage for most of them? Is part of Wikipedia's mission really to have all of the members of congress, or would we just link out to that?
My suspicion is that whatever the policies say, a lot of this would get AFDd.
In any case, an encyclopedia is supposed to summarise knowledge. Unless a particular person is really important to that *summary* for more than one thing they probably shouldn't be in the Wikipedia.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
-- -Ian Woollard
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l