2009/3/3 Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net>: > With respect to biographies of living persons, unless there is sufficient > reliable published information about a person to flesh out a well > balanced article we shouldn't have one.
This is an important principle, I think. Not necessarily in this form - but IMO the discussion has suffered a bit from a one-dimensional focus on notability. Let's say there's a three-step test: 1) The article is not a balanced and complete biography of a person's life an work; 2) The person is marginally notable; 3) The person wants the article deleted. If all those three tests are met, the article would be deleted. If only 1) and 2) are met, at the very least, the article would be templated for improvement, with a clear note saying that if you're the subject and you want it deleted, you can request that through a simple process. Essentially, we've often said that an article which only consists of "An apple is a fruit" can become a masterpiece overtime, but I think when it comes to one-sided biographies, we need to take into account that our happy little article workshop is also used by nearly 300 million people as a one stop reference. What's the justification for publishing poor quality biographies of marginally notable people, even against the subject's wishes? -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
