On 4/20/07, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com wrote:
Kirill Lokshin wrote:
But why do we need -- or want -- a biography of Brandt so much?
...
So why, then, have we dug in our heels so thoroughly on this? Why can't we just get rid of the article already and all go back to doing something rather more useful than this endless fighting?
Because he's a notable figure, and we should have articles on notable subjects. Just because he's noisy about it doesn't mean we should treat it differently, and his noise level has made him the poster boy for folks who want to have subjects dictate content.
If it weren't him, it would be someone else. If you don't want to be noteworthy, don't do things that attract attention to yourself.
Our notability guidelines -- overly simplistic nature and permissiveness towards the utterly trivial aside --were never meant to be a suicide pact. The question to ask is not whether Brandt "meets the criteria for inclusion" or whatever the wording of the day is. It's whether having an article on him actually *benefits* anyone, and whether any benefit outweighs the frankly horrific cost we're having to pay to keep it around.
Kirill