On 23/05/07, Trebor Rowntree trebor.rowntree@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/23/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
No, at the moment the problem is that people really think you can outvote fundamental content policies.
But where is the fundamental content policy that advocates deletion of _sourced_ articles about individuals famous for negative reasons? I'm not saying it's wrong, but I don't see it in the fundamental content policies.
Is the fame itself notable? This is explained in some detail in WP:BLP.
e.g. I have (on request of the subject) zapped an article on the alleged girlfriend of an MP (she may well have been) who had been in a couple of newspapers. The article was immaculately sourced, and it was still basically an attack piece on someone of no particular fame at all. The references section was longer than the text. Fucksake, they even looked her up on the electoral roll. The article was zapped and killed and salted and jumped up and down upon, and that was absolutely the proper course of action. If she does something herself, rather than merely having the misfortune of being linked to someone famous, that might be worth an article; but it hasn't happened yet.
It's not just sourcing - it's that the incidents or events themselves are notable. And the article doesn't have to be written tomorrow, and insistence on keeping it in RIGHT NOW is deeply missing the point.
- d.