On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Carcharoth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:23 PM, geni <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 30 March 2010 18:16, David Goodman <[email protected]> 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]]? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
