Eclecticology wrote:
Although I very much support the inclusion of the [[Rachel Corrie]] page as properly encyclopedic, I see no value in continuing the images page, which adds nothing to the subject. The biographical
page does include a few statements (like her love of gardening) that have nothing to do with her claim to fame, and therefore go beyond encyclopedia material, I would be content to let those details stay for the next few months.
Actually, Stephen King's rock band (with Amy Tan, Dave Barry, and Anne Rice) has nothing to do with his claim to fame, but I wouldn't mind reading about it. Similarly, that Kubrick was a photographer as well as a director is not so pressing (though one could argue that photography affected his directing--ok, one could, and I will). Less so with King's guitar playing. The only reason I haven't put in what Moby does with his spare time is because I personally consider it boring, but I wouldn't mind if anyone else added it. (when he's not waiting tables at his restaurant or composing music, he's attending concerts, taking photos, or playing Scrabble with his friends).
If the claim is unduly praising, or unverifiable, then that's something else entirely. But that it's irrelevant to her fame shouldn't be the deciding factor (but let me be clear that I think explaining why a subject is controversial, well-known, or generally discussed *should* be our goal as writers).
IMO,
kq
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com