Wikipedia talk:Notability: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Kevin Murray (talk | contribs) |
Kevin Murray (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 897:
:::: I don't see the need for including "secondary." Primary sources which are not primary research may establish notability, based on the notability of the [[primary source]]. Clearly this adds more subjectivity, but it seems impossible to have a purely objective standard for inclusion. --[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 16:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::Keeping in mind that ''none'' of the wording has consensus support, the only issue I have with your comment here is that "subject" is somehow mitigated in the bullet points - I'm not seeing it. Perhaps you mean the section in non-trivial that says that it need not be the only subject, but it doesn't solve the issue, especially in terms of notability - a series of "trivial" mentions can establish notability, such as mentions in greater articles about important things, a few sentences about a related subject, etc. One or two may not establish much, but if you have 5 "trivial" mentions that say five different things, it establishes the importance. --[[User:Badlydrawnjeff|badlydrawnjeff]] <small>[[User_talk:Badlydrawnjeff|talk]]</small> 16:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::: This is subjective based on the definition of "trivial" which is such a loose word. But I do agree that notability can be cummulative from many sources. I just don't think that we can codify this to absolute objectivity. How can we achieve your goal without opening the barn door to the nonsense? --[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 16:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
: I feel that the current version allows enough flexibility within the bullet points to address extraordinary circumstances where multiple sources are not available. While I have preferred other versions, I feel this is fairly close. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it has demonstrated consensus, but it has my support. However, quoting this at sub-pages without the bullet points will be misleading. --[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 14:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
| |||