On 4/22/07, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 22/04/07, doc doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
If no one else has ever published an article which is about the
person, as opposed to mentioning them in some regard, that should be a clue.
That would be another way to go. Unless there is a published biography on the individual, our default is deletion. Again there will be exceptions - but we could let afd sort that out. We just change the default - you need a consensus for inclusion if there is no other biography in publication.
As long as we don't go down the tempting but misleading path of construing "biography" as "a published monograph" rather than "a reasonably lengthy article which treats them biographically as opposed to a news subject", then this sounds a good first cut.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Even when you take Andrew's point into account it's going to cause bias. Children are often treated as news subjects even when their achievements are noteworthy. Their articles (at least the ones I check) are rarely subject to BLP issues. So it would cut articles that aren't causing a problem in the first place.
Mgm