Carcharoth wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notability_in_Wikipedia > Rather misses the points that (a) the "sources" metric for notability is horribly bad, in that "famous for being famous" rates much higher than "made an obscure medical advance that only saves thousands of lives a year", unless you work on it, and (b) notability is a really bad concept for determining inclusion, except that we have no snappy replacement. Inclusion is what matters, ultimately. "Voting on notability" is obviously evil piled on evil, but somehow the double negative has worked for us.
Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
