[WikiEN-l] Looking for thoughts on statistics

[Martijn Hoekstra]

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:23 PM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 30 March 2010 18:16, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> To be expected it was invented by the BLP mob. See [[Wikipedia:BLP1E]].
>
> To be fair, that refers to (or should refer to) a chronologically
> constrained (i.e. brief) event that propels someone to passing fame in
> a newspaper or online, not to a career where someone is notable for
> only one thing.
>
> Carcharoth
>

I have always had a bit of a problem with blp1e. It is a sort of blp
thing combined with wp:notnews. I am generally off the opinion that if
the specific event is notable enough to warrant an article, and the
specific event is centered solely around that person, I believe the
article should be on that person, focusing on that event. Say, a
person wins some sort of trophy, lets call him John Doe, and the
trophy the awesome trophy. And say there is a lot of media attention
that John wins the trophy, enough to say there is more then passing
coverage, enough for [[WP:N]] in general. Should we have an article
[[John Doe winning the awesome trophy in 2010]]? Or should we just
have one on [[John Doe]]?