Secondary sources are not a valid metric to determine notability unless you are a paper encyclopedia or seeking universal notability. Universal notability is a mistake according to Jimmy Wales: http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/05/wikipedia_is_ju.html
In addition secondary sources do not necessarily establish notability. Every US marine that served in Iraq or every victim of 9/11 attacks have plenty of secondary coverage. Not every one of them are notable.
[[WP:SPINOUT]]'s and [[WP:STUB]]'s are not banned
- White Cat
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
While true, it is not in itself sufficient for an article. Independent, reliable, secondary sources decide if a subject is significant enough to write a significant amount on. If they say no, we follow suit and say no, and make a quick entry on a list. We don't second-guess them. Though the list entry can certainly cite the primary source.
-- Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l