[WikiEN-l] Brandt, bios, and other thoughts

[Fred Bauder]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Philippe Beaudette [mailto:philippebeaudette at gmail.com]
>Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 04:37 PM
>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Brandt, bios, and other thoughts
>
>
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: James Farrar 
>  To: English Wikipedia 
>  Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 4:47 PM
>  Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Brandt, bios, and other thoughts
>
>
>  On 20/04/07, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
>  > Posted on behalf of Musical Linguist, at her request:
>
>  > The argument for deleting it is that it's the decent thing to do, and
>  > it might stop the stalking.
>
>  "Might" isn't good enough, I'm afraid.
>
>  > An argument against deleting it is that
>  > he's notable enough to *permit* inclusion. He is not notable enough to
>  > *require* inclusion. We would not lose credibility as an encylopaedia
>  > if the article were gone.
>
>  I don't recognise degrees of notability beyond the binary state of
>  "notable enough to have an article" or "not". Talk of degrees of
>  notability are unhelpful because you could be faced with a question of
>  "where do we draw the line?" - we already have that line.
>
>  Deleting an article because the subject wants it deleted would set a
>  terrible precedent. What do we do in the future if someone else wants
>  their bio deleted? If we delete this one, we must delete all bios on
>  request.
>
>
>  ------------------
>  Hmmm... no, I don't buy that. - I don't buy that this is precedent setting, even were it to happen.  I simply don't think any argument that includes "we must...." is ever acceptable.
>
>  We can choose to delete for minor notables, and not for major notables.  It adds a layer of decision making (who decides who's a major notable and a minor notable?), but that's not insurmountable.  Frankly, I also don't buy that there are no levels of notability.  Sanjaya, say, is notable today, but will he be in five years?  50 years?  Whereas, Charles Darwin is notable forever.
>
>  Philippe

We are having a lot of trouble with specious arguments being accepted. Thank you for pointing out the simple logic that there is true notability and marginal notability. We make many distinguishing decisions. I can still remember Sanjaya, even see and hear him in my mind's eye, but for how long?

Fred