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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l