[WikiEN-l] Frustrated

[Guy Chapman aka JzG]

On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:29:06 -0700, Bryan Derksen
<bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:

>It's not like we don't have lots of other arbitrary criteria for
>inclusion already, both in lists and in article retention. But in this
>case as long as the list's criteria can be evaluated reasonably
>objectively I see nothing inherently wrong with it. 

OK, so try this:

* Average height increases over time, so the criterion excludes people
who were notable for their height in their time (e.g. Edward I of
England).

* Average height varies with over 10" difference between the average
height of the tallest nation (Netherlands) and the shortest (I think
that's Vietnam, but can't remember offhand).

* The tallest true pygmy would be notable as such while still
remaining well below the criterion.

* There is a special "fudge rule" to stop it being a list of
basketball players, which is a really, really bad sign.

* Heights of circus giants and historical figures are not necessarily
(!) accurate.

* Acromegaly and giantism produce extremes of height which exceed in
many cases the effects of normal variation (see Robert Wadlow)

* A notably tall ballet dancer would be well under the limit (there
are ballerinas who are under the 6ft mark but still remarkably tall
/for ballerinas/ - same would apply to male dancers).

So: the list is completely arbitrary in that it excludes many who are
notable for their height while including many who are just - well,
tall.

Guy (JzG)
-- 
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG