[WikiEN-l] The outside world on biographies of slightly notablepeople

[Michael Snow]

Jeff Raymond wrote:
> Andrew Gray wrote:
>> a) Should we start considering whether or not the subject is a public
>> figure in deciding whether or not the article is appropriate? There
>> is, of course, no clear bright line...
>>
>> b) If not, why not? (Bonus points for giving an ethical argument)
> Because the line between "public" and "private" in non-legal purposes 
> no longer exists.
Thinking of it as a line of demarcation, instead of a continuum, is part 
of the difficulty people have in dealing with this.
> You don't get to choose whether you're public or private is the 
> greater point.  It's sort of like "marginal" or "minimal" or 
> "slightly" notability, or being "a little bit pregnant."  You may not 
> *want* to be noteworthy or public or known or pregnant, or want others 
> to be, but it happens and that's that.
Whether someone is a public figure is only the binary question you 
present it as in the most superficial sense. Many people are 
limited-purpose public figures. Some, though not all, are involuntarily 
so. But it's not just about their choice, and it's overly simplistic to 
elevate the denial that their choice matters into the determining issue. 
Chosen or not, their limited status as a public figure in one context 
does not mean that you can choose for them, and make them a public 
figure for additional contexts. People trying to connect additional dots 
and effectively doing original research and analysis is a serious 
concern here.

The status of limited-purpose public figures will depend on such issues 
as the significance of the issue in which they were involved, the extent 
of coverage, the prominence of their role and whether they sought it 
out, and their ability to make their personal viewpoints heard. All of 
this goes into where they figure in the continuum from private to public.

Inherent in someone's status as a limited-purpose public figure are 
limitations in how we can appropriately cover them. Sometimes it will be 
fundamentally impossible to cover these people neutrally in a 
stand-alone biographical article. Where to discuss their particular 
situation, whether to name them in that discussion, and whether to have 
their name be a redirect to that destination, are all legitimate 
editorial issues.
> If we want to write a general interest encyclopedia, we need to be 
> able to disconnect from our personal perspectives and situations and 
> instead look at these issues dispassionately.
Indeed. But looking at issues dispassionately is not the same as 
slavishly bowing to prerogative or process, either.

--Michael Snow