On 12/28/06, Ron Ritzman <ritzman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I understand that new articles get close scrutiny but just how do
deletable articles that have been around for a while come to the
attention to those who regularly nominate articles for deletion?
(especially if the article is otherwise well written)
I ask this because recently I came across a fairly well written
article about a computer term that had a prod tag on it for being an
unsourced neologism. It probably was since all the google hits for it
pointed to mirrors of its WP article but I still decided to replace
the prod with a sources tag to give the original author a chance to
add a source. However, I started to wonder why the person who first
prodded it suspected it was a neologism as it couldn't have been the
first term he ran across on wikipedia that he never heard about. Does
he prod them all?
If all the Google hits point to mirrors the article in question isn't
Even if they haven't heard about the term, they appear to have made an
effort to find evidence it exists.
A computer term that lacks Google hits probably lacks notability too.
The same could be asked about notability. Just what makes one suspect
that a particular person/band/school/company/webcomic
etc. is not
notable? Please note that I am not saying that such articles should be
kept but there has to be something in an otherwise well written
article to cause someone to investigate the article's eligibility to
be in wikipedia besides "I've never heard if him/it"
Lack of establishing notability according to the different notability
criteria at [[WP:BIO]], [[WP:MUSIC]], etc would be a reason to investigate
it further. A lot of people don't even mention what makes an article subject
worth being written about.