[WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review

[doc]

Todd Allen wrote:
> doc wrote:
>> Trebor Rowntree wrote:
>>   
>>> On 5/24/07, doc <doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>     
>>>> 2) And this is important - although Smith and Lewinsky
>>>> are only notable for one thing - the fact that Lewinsky's life has been
>>>> so public means we can write a full balanced biography for her. He bio
>>>> want say "she sucked Clinton's cock" it will say something about her
>>>> background, career, life after the incident - in short we get the whole
>>>> person. One incident yes - but that's given us enough sources to write
>>>> the biography. We have no sources to write a biography on Smith (and if
>>>> we find out any more it is likely to be OR) - only to record an
>>>> incident. That's not a biography.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> But in cases like these (for private individuals), BLP actually says to
>>> include "*only* material relevant to their notability." As David Gerard
>>> said, including things like someone's GPA is absurd and unnecessary f that
>>> has no relevance to that person's fame. But aiming to write a full balanced
>>> biography directly opposes including only material relevant to notability.
>>> Which are we supposed to be doing?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>     
>> Monica's whole life is notable - there are basted biographies on her. 
>> There may be 'the incident' but the incident has made her whole life a 
>> notable, sources and verifiable story. We can write a biography. The 
>> same is true for the Olympic medal winner - notable only for winning 
>> medals, but because of that, a lot of biographical details that are 
>> otherwise notable, are already recorded in good sources.
>>
>> But if the notability refers only to the incident and nothing else has 
>> really been recorded by good sources - then all we can write about is 
>> the incident - then we can't write a biography.
>>
>> A good thing to ask yourself is: if this person died tomorrow, would any 
>> newspaper, or important publication in the subject area, print an 
>> obituary. If the answer is 'No - no chance' then we probably should not 
>> have a biography.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>   
> I'm not sure that's a very good way to do it. Newspapers will print an
> obituary of damn near anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
I didn't say if they would have a biography - we should have a bio. But 
if they wouldn't, we certainly shouldn't.

Twins switched a birth won't have an obituary 80 years later. And I'd 
seriously doubt Brian P would either. Serious newspapers anyway.