On 15 February 2011 18:17, Ian Woollard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15/02/2011, geni <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 15 February 2011 16:19, Ian Woollard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Yeah, really. That page claims we only have 3% of notable Poles. Are you >>> really, seriously, telling me we only have 3% of ALL notable >>> biographies??? >>> Because that's what that page is assuming to calculate that 40 million. >> >> It's possible. Our coverage of say British MPs starts to fall apart >> pre-20th century. > > But should each MP necessarily have his own biography? > >>> It's not impossible to calculate, you look at the counts from an >>> encyclopedias of famous people. And they very typically list historical >>> people as well as living people. >> >> But they all hit dead tree limitations. > > Then they're not capable of being reliably sourced.
Of course they are. It's just the sources are things other than encyclopedias of famous people > Only if they're notable, and reliably sourced. I don't think they're > notable enough to have their own article simply for having played. In practice yes they are. Local newspapers tend to use their local sports teams as filler. > So you're saying that you don't know; and it's not a lot of use is it? No I'm saying it wasn't possible to know. You were the one who claimed it was. -- geni _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
