On 5/4/06, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher(a)student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
On 5/3/06, Gallagher Mark George
No, it has to *assert* the notability of its
clearing up CAT:CSD I see a lot of speedy taggings where the tagger
simply figured "sure, there's an assertion of notability there, but
I don't think it's good enough". Wrong.
How does an article go about asserting the notability of its subject?
What would be an example of an article which asserts notability but
doesn't establish it?
An article saying "Joe Bloggs is a man from Golbourn" would be speedy
deletable, because it doesn't assert that Joe Bloggs is in any way
notable (it's also obnoxious, because it just assumes that everyone
knows where Golbourn is).
"Joe Bloggs is a man from Golbourn who won the Nobel Prize in partying
down!" would be speedy deletable, because it's nonsense.
"Joe Bloggs is a man from Golbourn who won the Nobel Prize in physics."
would be sufficient, in my book.
OK, so being from Golbourn isn't notable, but winning the Nobel Prize
in physics is (at least in your book).
Any other trait, I guess I just gotta guess.
"He won the nobel prize!" under the title
"Joe Bloggs" would be speedy
deletable because of a lack of context and a desire to see how Jimbo
Would "Joe Bloggs won the nobel prize." be speedy deleteable (assuming
it was true, and not patent nonsense). If so, why wouldn't we want
the otherwise deleting admin to just substitute the name for "He" and
the period for exclamation point? If not, which nobel prizes are
notable, and which aren't?