It depends upon the importance of the person who is the subject.
People care very much whom Einstein's children were, or Darwin's, or
Pauling's, but not some random scientist. When they seem to be
inserted to make the article suitably long to be impressive, to fill
in the article, that we should be reluctant to include them.
I'm particularly doubtful about bios where the final line or two is
about the subject's hobbies and children--that is a diagnostic sign
for either imitating the PR style of sriting, or copyvio from PR.
An article about a person should primarily be about what the person is
notable for.
Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
WJhonson(a)aol.com wrote:
The names of the subject's children are
encyclopedia-worthy.
I'm sure you must have meant something else.
Why do you say that? In most cases we should not mention children by name.
Charles
_______________________________________________
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
--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG