[WikiEN-l] Notability in Wikipedia

[Andrew Turvey]

Forgive my rather circular logic, I know, but the Wikipedia article on "Notability in Wikipedia" can only refer to issues that have been discussed in reliable secondary sources. It comes back to the whole point about verifiability: we can't add something even if we know it to be untrue unless we can find some other reliable person stating it. 

Given that restriction, I though it was a rather good article. 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Matthews" <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> 
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org> 
Sent: Monday, 27 April, 2009 14:26:44 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal 
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Notability in Wikipedia 

Carcharoth wrote: 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notability_in_Wikipedia 
> 
Rather misses the points that (a) the "sources" metric for notability is 
horribly bad, in that "famous for being famous" rates much higher than 
"made an obscure medical advance that only saves thousands of lives a 
year", unless you work on it, and (b) notability is a really bad concept 
for determining inclusion, except that we have no snappy replacement. 
Inclusion is what matters, ultimately. "Voting on notability" is 
obviously evil piled on evil, but somehow the double negative has worked 
for us. 

Charles 


_______________________________________________ 
WikiEN-l mailing list 
WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org 
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l