On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Charles Matthews wrote: > You are paraphrasing from [[Wikipedia:Notability]]. However, as is > common enough in this (endless, unresolved) discussions, you are not > doing so accurately enough. Firstly, [[Wikipedia:Notability]] is only a > guideline, not an official policy for anything.
In practice, guidelines end up having the same effect as policies: anyone who can quote them in a dispute that is anywhere near close always wins. Policies don't appreciably differ from guidelines in this respect. > Secondly, you are > paraphrasing from the detailed explanation of the first section, but > missing the essential (really) point. Which is that "If a topic has > received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent > of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a > stand-alone article" is a sufficient condition, not a necessary one. In the very example I'm bringing up, the notability guidelines *were* interpreted as a necessary condition. Since the article failed to satisfy them, it was deleted for lack of notability. And I'd wager that notability is pretty much always used this way. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
