It depends upon the importance of the person who is the subject. People care very much whom Einstein's children were, or Darwin's, or Pauling's, but not some random scientist. When they seem to be inserted to make the article suitably long to be impressive, to fill in the article, that we should be reluctant to include them.
I'm particularly doubtful about bios where the final line or two is about the subject's hobbies and children--that is a diagnostic sign for either imitating the PR style of sriting, or copyvio from PR. An article about a person should primarily be about what the person is notable for. Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Charles Matthews <[email protected]> wrote: > [email protected] wrote: >> The names of the subject's children are encyclopedia-worthy. >> I'm sure you must have meant something else. >> >> > Why do you say that? In most cases we should not mention children by name. > > Charles > > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
