On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Charles Matthews wrote: >> Something that has a Rush Limbaugh episode >> dedicated to it is probably notable in any sane sense, even if Rush Limbaugh >> isn't a reliable source. > Sorry, what if I say that I neither know nor care about anything Rush > Limbaugh does or says (which is true), that I'm on the other side of the > Atlantic from almost everyone who does care, and that puts me in the > same position as about 90% of the world's population?
The same thing that happens if it's in a newspaper (which counts as a reliable source) and you don't get the newspaper on the other side of the ocean, and the newspapers on your side won't even print it because nobody cares about it over where you are. The same thing that happens if there's some European town which gets an article even though nobody in America cares about it and its total population is smaller than the audience of Rush Limbaugh. You're just making an argument for European provincialism disguised as an argument against American provincialism. Notability, either in Wikipedia or in real life, doesn't require that everyone in the world care about something, just that enough people do. "Enough people" need not include you. > Certainly if we didn't have the exclusion of most blogs, we would have a > system that would be fantastically easy to game: how hard is to get some > topic mentioned in a dozen blogs? Then you need to have criteria for blogs which are stricter than "every blog" but still looser than what we have now. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
