[WikiEN-l] Notability on the skfields

[Todd Allen]

Ken Arromdee wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2007, Todd Allen wrote:
>   
>>> Can anyone actually derive Notability from neutrality, verifiability
>>> and no original research in elegant and obvious steps? Or work toward
>>> this?
>>>       
>> Well, let's take a stab here.
>> 2. From NPOV: "NPOV requires views to be represented without bias." If
>> the only source we have is first-party, the article will be inherently
>> biased, as it is nearly impossible to write fairly and neutrally about
>> oneself.
>>     
> etc.
>
> This reminds me of why Sherlock Holmes deductions don't work in the real
> world.  Holmes makes a plausible-sounding deduction that completely ignores
> the fact that each step is not 100% certain, and the uncertainty accumulates
> from step to step.  If you string together ten steps, each of which is 90%
> certain, your result will be useless.
>
> Each of your steps is true most of the time, but occasionally not true (you
> even had to admit it in the one quoted above, by adding the word "nearly").
> The derivation won't work, for the same reason that Holmes won't work.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>   
"It's damn near impossible to write objectively about yourself or
something you have a vested interest in promoting" has a lot higher
certainty than 90%. I'd put it somewhere around 99.999%, and even that's
generous, that's saying 1 in 100,000 people could do it.
And the other two are just logical deductions, there's no probability there.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070512/4db2064d/attachment.pgp