[WikiEN-l] Tim Noah addresses the notion of notability in another Slate article

[Keith Old]

Folks,

Tim Noah has published another article on Slate about consideration about
whether he was notable enough for Wikipedia.

http://www.slate.com/id/2160644/?nav=fix

Noah concludes:


*The pro-Tims tended to agree with me that the notability standard ought to
be eliminated outright. The anti-Tims argued that the notability standard
was a necessary bulwark against anarchy and noted that I myself had asserted
that it rendered me ineligible. Eventually an administrator (handle:
JDoorjam) cut the process short, which is allowed under a **Wikipedia
rule*<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:IAR>
* that says you can ignore all other rules when the site's basic health is
at stake. JDoorjam decreed that I would be "speedy kept" (i.e., reinstated
immediately), and he explained he had short-circuited discussion because it
was inviting "troll magnetry" (i.e., lots of uncouth people logging on and
saying rude things) and "edit warring" (i.e., people repeatedly doing and
undoing the same edits). As I write this, the final entered comment reads as
follows:*

*Wow. That's just shameful. A run of the mill columnist intimidated you into
keeping his article by bitching in a public forum. If that's all it takes,
Wiki has a long way to go before it can be considered at all legitimate.*

*Not my intent, but also not my concern. I continue to believe that
Wikipedia should stop putting on airs about legitimacy and repeal its
notability standard. In a future column, I'll consider the arguments against
my open-the-floodgates position as readers have presented them to me over
the last few days.*

I don't think I agree wholeheartedly with that conclusion but it will
continued to be argued long and hard on various Wikipedia forums.

Regards



*Keith Old*