[Wikipedia-l] Non-notability "abuse"

[Marco Chiesa]

J.L.W.S. The Special One wrote:

>Even if we don't draw an exact line, we can reduce the range of values for
>which a reasonable Wikipedian would draw it at.
>
>"One-size-fits-all" notability criteria are impossible to set. We need
>topic-specific notability guidelines that could determine notability, or
>lack thereof, in at least 90% of cases (exceptions will always exist).
>Moreover, notability criteria should not be systemically biased. For
>example, the notability criteria for films states that a film which wins a
>"major award" is notable. In a footnote, the Academy Awards and Cannes are
>listed as examples of "major awards". However, what about Chinese films?
>Shouldn't the Golden Horse Awards be considered "major"?
>
>  
>
Notability lists should always be whitelists. At least that's what we 
tried to do on it.wp. We still get a lot of criticism because scientists 
are whitelisted if they win a Nobel prizes and footballers if they have 
played in the top league (Serie A, Premiership...). This doesn't mean 
that a scientist that hasn't won a Nobel prize is non-notable, but that 
we couldn't find consensus on wider criteria that wouldn't have been too 
wide. Explaining that whatever does not fit a whitelist doesn't 
necessarily fit a blacklist is hard, very hard.

Cruccone