I think it is important to remember why we're doing this. Our purpose isn't the judge people's notability. Our purpose is to provide useful information to people. It is clear from the page views they get that BLPs are useful to people. As long as there are sufficient reliable sources to write more than a stub about someone, then I don't see why we shouldn't have an article about them. That is basically what the General Notability Guideline says.
I do think we have a problem with writing about things too soon, but it isn't so extreme that we should wait until people are retired or dead to write about them. I did have a policy proposal prepared a few years ago that I never really proposed because I thought it was too unlikely to be successful. It was to set a limit on how recent something can be and still appear on Wikipedia. I can't remember what the limit I was going to propose was, but it was about a month - if something happened less than a month ago, don't write about it on Wikipedia. Write about it on Wikinews and either link to it from an existing Wikipedia article or create a redirect to it if the subject is new or newly notable. Then, after a month once everything has settled down, we can write a decent article (as opposed to one where every paragraph starts "As of"). I think that kind of policy would be useful for BLPs, particularly 1EVENT cases. It is often much easier to tell after a month whether something is really notable for an encyclopaedia than it is straight away (how many AFDs have we all seen where people are saying "This will almost certainly be notable." - much better to wait and see rather than try and predict notability). _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
