On 10/1/08, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) newyorkbrad@gmail.com wrote:
In Wikipedia jargon, I could simply say that "you left Notability off your list [of NPOV, NOR, V]"
Brad, I can only compare this to [[You forgot Poland]] in terms of undue weight.
The holy hand grenade of "notability" is not a fundamental content rule, only a set of wholly subjective criteria for users to badger each other with on AFDs.
*Keep, subject is discussed in 50 sources, which is significant. *Delete, subject is discussed in *only* 50 sources, which is pathetic (i'm more notable than that). **So write an article about yourself ***No, that would be COI. ****Then I'll write it for you. *****No, that would be harassment.
Sounds about like:
*Support, user has almost 22 thousand edits. *Oppose, user has less than 22 thousand edits. **You were promoted with half that. ***That was a year ago. ****So you assume 100% inflation? *****No, I have templates to calculate it.
There is plenty of accurate, neutral, fully sourceable material about living persons that still has no place in Wikipedia.
If this is true it should be true whether or not the subject is living (or is a person). As the adages go, if I can't say it to your face I shouldn't say it behind your back. If I'm not allowed to mention it at your wedding, I won't say it at your funeral either. etc. etc. etc.
—C.W.