On 10/1/06, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One major problem - to my mind, an article written by
that is notable, sourced, etc ought not be deleted.
With 'only' 1.3 millionish articles I suppose it's not TOO unlikely
that there are still some seriously notable living people without
articles who might want to start one themselves...
If a person is notable, then some unrelated person will eventually
come by and write an article.
Thus, while the deletion of a self authored article about a notable
person might be a loss, it isn't much of a loss. Wikipedia won't be
done in a day.
Also: an honest and sincere person probably would have a hard time
figuring out if they, their company, or their client is notable enough
for inclusion in Wikipedia (since we, often, can't figure it out
without a poll) ... notability just isn't a good criteria to direct
people about self authored articles. ... But no-self-articles is clear
and can be followed by anyone who is acting honestly.
Some basic thoughts:
1) There are more non-notable people than notable by far.
2) The desire to have a wikipedia article about yourself is at best
weakly and more likely *inversely* related to your actual notability.
3) If someone/thing is really notable a mostly disinterested third
party will eventually want to write about it.
Given the above it would appear that a solid rejection of
self-initiated articles is sound policy.