Good grief, Carcharoth, there it is!!!!! Brilliant! I've been stumbling about for years looking for a way to differentiate between legitimate encyclopaedic biography, which Wikipedia should do, and the problematic, armature-journalistic, selectively biased, originally researched, WP:NOTNEWS skirting, stuff that causes all the problems. If we could just agree on that definition you've given all would be well.
No chance of that happening, unfortunately. Scott -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carcharoth Sent: 28 March 2011 17:29 To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] iCorrect >I've argued before that the minimum standard for any biographical >article should be a published biography of some sort, that at minimum >includes birth year (or some details on why the birth year is not >known). These can range from self-published on an official website, to >short bios in conference proceedings, to an actual published >book-length biography. What shouldn't be done is piecing together bits >from newspaper articles and primary sources - that is what official >and unofficial biographers do, and we shouldn't be doing it in their >stead. >Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
