On 6/11/07, Matthew Brown <morven(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/11/07, Jeff Raymond
<jeff.raymond(a)internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:
If you have to do any interpreting, why are you
speedying it in the first
place?
Exactly; speedy deletion criteria are supposed to be cut and dried.
If there is an assertion of notability, it can't be speedied.
Anthony, where did you get the text above?
Which text? "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received
significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the
subject."? That's from [[Wikipedia:Notability]].
I certainly was not from
[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion]], which states:
7. Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content. An article
about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web
content that does not assert the importance or significance of its
subject. If controversial, or if there has been a previous AfD that
resulted in the article being kept, the article should be nominated
for AfD instead.
That's even worse, as "importance or significance" is even less well
defined than "notability".
It's quite common, although not actually supported
by the criteria, to
speedy delete articles where the claim to importance/significance is
not credible. I think that's a bit questionable at times, since we're
introducing subjectiveness to the procedure.
Isn't "importance or significance" subjective enough? Or would "Joe
Bob is an important person" qualify as asserting its importance?