On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Carcharoth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Martijn Hoekstra > <[email protected]> wrote: >> 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. >> >> 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]]? > > Didn't that evolve from the "murdered people" standard, where instead > of having an article on a person who was murdered, you have an article > on the crime? Not that such a standard was completely adopted, I don't > think. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Murders > > That is what I mean, though a lot of that is tabloid-ish journalism. > > Carcharoth
Ugh, murders, the kind of articles where you get stuck trying to explain that "he left behind a loving wife and to beautiful children" should not be in the article, even if you have 5 refs that say his wive loved him, 8 that say she was left behind, and 15 (each kid) that say the kids were pretty. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
