[Wikipedia-l] Max Weismann...does he deserve an article?

[Karen AKA Kajikit]

Manning Bartlett wrote:
> 
> On the talk page for Max Weismann maveric wrote the following...
> 
> And what has this person done to warrent an encyclopedia article? There are A
> LOT of presidents and directors of entities and a lot more editors -- why is
> this one so special? --[[user:maveric149|maveric149]]
> 
> Now I'm not criticising Dan at all here, simply exploring the issues that this
> comment raises.
> 
> It is a question that strikes at the very heart of the Wikipedia project... who
> decides what deserves to be here and what doesn't? The article in question does
> not contravene any of the Wikipedia rules, it does not advertise, it's not
> offensive... it's just boring and trivial, and probably of no interest to
> anyone except his close friends.

[snip]

Hmmm... IMO, if you can write at least three interesting paragraphs
containing valid information on a subject/person/thing, then it deserves
to be there. To take Star Wars as an example, I don't think we need a
page for say characters who said two lines in Attack of the Clones, or
for the actors who played them. There just isn't enough to say about
them. But if there's a character who says 2 lines in AOTC and pops up
again in the next one whatever it's called and was also in the first
one, well then there's something to say about them.

I guess it's a matter of personal taste more than anything else.

-- 

Karen AKA Kajikit

You can take the dragon out of Alfandra, but you can never take Alfandra
out of the dragon (or the Kitty)...

Come and visit my part of the web:
Kajikit's Corner: http://Kajikit.netfirms.com/
Aussie Support Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AussieSupport
Allergyfree Eating Recipe Swap:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Allergyfree_Eating 

Love and huggles to all!