[WikiEN-l] Looking for thoughts on statistics

[David Goodman]

If you want a higher level, 90% of the present members of the US
National Academy of Engineering do not have articles.

"More than one thing" seems a weird standard, in my opinion. An
athlete wouldnt be notable unless also a movie star? But perhaps you
mean elected twice to their legislature?
I do not consider myself an  extreme inclusionist. I for example do
not support the inclusion of members of most city councils, or local
school boards.


David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG



On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29/03/2010, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Even for the US, about 80% of the members of state legislatures
>> historically are not covered. For the current Michigan House of
>> Representatives, only 50% of the current members have articles, and
>> almost none of the earlier ones.
>> this is very low-lying fruit, well within the reach of any beginner.
>
> There's the question as to how notable they really are; would you ever
> get significant coverage for most of them? Is part of Wikipedia's
> mission really to have all of the members of congress, or would we
> just link out to that?
>
> My suspicion is that whatever the policies say, a lot of this would get AFDd.
>
> In any case, an encyclopedia is supposed to summarise knowledge.
> Unless a particular person is really important to that *summary* for
> more than one thing they probably shouldn't be in the Wikipedia.
>
>> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>
> --
> -Ian Woollard
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>