On 27/06/07, Brock Weller <brock.weller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'd take some objection to this, my father's
in the "who's who of
professionals" publication (or was, im not sure if he still is, but he has
the early 90's edition that first had him). He's somewhat known among
managers and such, helped with the roll out of TQM in the government back in
the day. Some other minor things, a couple low level "presidential"
commissions to ease bureaucracy in some small division in some second tier
department, but nothing approaching real notability. People who are
marginally notable in a specific field can get in those books, but it doesnt
mean that they are generally marginally notable. Who's who is almost on the
verge of being a vanity press.
There is a substantial difference between "Who's Who", the original
general publication, and "Who's Who ---", the genre of publications.
The original takes "notability" (with a few odd caveats) as its basic
threshold of entry; the various "Who's Who in X" are not nearly as
discriminating, and will often take anyone willing to pay.
Yes, it's confusing, but there you go. I believe this all has its
roots in a *really complex* transatlantic trademark dispute...
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk