Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Notifications?: Reply |
→Draft Article Rejected: Reply |
||
Line 565:
:::::::::::Wikipedia, alas, is extraordinarily inconsistent within the scientist category as well as between categories of important and unimportant people. Is a MLB baseball player that played 4 games 69 years ago famous? Worthy of being in an encyclopedia?
:::::::::::By the way, I came here to try to improve the site by proving expert content. And in the past, I made a $500 financial contribution to Wikipedia via the Wikimedia foundation. But it sure feels like this place has become too rigid and ossified. Too many rules, and too little thought. [[User:Factsnfigurestoo|Factsnfigurestoo]] ([[User talk:Factsnfigurestoo|talk]]) 22:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::I replied to this topic earlier, giving suggestions that you appear not to have taken on board. By the way, Wikipedia articles are by no means limited to deceased persons as you imply in your comments, as a simple search will demonstrate. All you (or anyone) as to do is to demonstrate that one, two, or preferably more "external, reputable sources" (not just paper that cite his work, that happens hopefully throughout science) have commented on the notability in his field of the relevant person, for example for producing significant research that has had impact more widely than his own research team or institution, or has been used and perhaps built upon elsewhere in the world, by other significant users. That is all. If such sources do not exist, then maybe the subject is not ready for a Wikipedia article (yet). That is all I have to say on the subject, good luck. [[User:Tony 1212|Tony 1212]] ([[User talk:Tony 1212|talk]]) 22:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
== Archiving a Chat at on Talk Page ==
| |||