On 4/10/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/9/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm [mailto: macgyvermagic@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 9, 2007 09:10 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: Opt Out for Not So Notable Biographies
On 4/9/07, Oldak Quill < oldakquill@gmail.com> wrote:
On 09/04/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
You are describing original research. Putting together information
you
have gathered from various sources and creating a sort of biography.
But it
is a pseudobiography, without substantial reference to the person
described,
except as they have received incidental media coverage. A golem you
yourself
have breathed life into.
I don't see why compiling an article from multiple sources would be
original
research. It's actually good to do it. It means you've verified your
info
from more than one source. Original research is when you interpret information and draw conclusion from it, which I didn't do.
Notability is based on what someone did in real life, I don't see the
way an
article was formed having any relevance to someone's notability.
Mgm
If the person is notable there will be verifiable material in reliable sources which set out the course of the persons life. Original research based on scrapes of information results in a "biography" on Wikipedia which by its nature must omit the non-published information regarding the person necessary to produce an adequate biography.
Fred
Do you consider a British child actor with a lead role in a BBC children's television series notable?
Mgm
Because you seem to say that if you can't find all the biographical details to fully fill in an infobox, someone isn't notable. How about people from Ancient Greece for whom no biography has ever been written and for whom their date of birth isn't known?
Mgm