On 5/25/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
From: Marc Riddell [mailto:michaeldavid86@comcast.net] on 5/25/07 12:22 PM, George Herbert at george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Šif the only things which are verifyably known about someone are in the context of a notable event which included them, perhaps as a rule the person is not themselves notable, and should only be covered in the article about the event.
George,
I believe this is an excellent idea.
Marc Riddell
The exception would be someone like Monica Lewinsky who successfully parlays their 15 minutes of negative fame into a more well rounded notability.
Fred
Right. We're evaluating based on overall notability and events, not just the one event. Lewinski and various others parlay their 15 minutes of negative fame into more attention and keep doing some other interesting things. Others seek to avoid further publicity after the initial events, and don't ever do anything else "notable" by our normal standards.
I agree with Jeff that a large grey area exists in the middle, over which much argument will no doubt ensue (it's impossible, or at least impractical, to figure out how to write down a policy that will without exception properly classify future events and decisions). But I think that this is a reasonable and viable underlying policy to work outwards from.