zero 0000 wrote:
> From: Guy Chapman aka JzG
<guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net>
Actually I
think this is a good litmus test for whether an individual
is encyclopaedically notable. If there are no sources for basic
biographical data other than the individual themselves, in other
words
if there has never been a reputably published biography or profile,
then I don't believe we can have an article.
This would include minor actors and exclude famous scientists.
Even scientists who have a large number of scientific achievements
are rarely the subjects of published biographies. Being famous
enough to get a mention in newspapers doesn't help either, since
such articles rarely provide information like place of birth.
Conference and conventions publish biographical data, I know the source
is generally the person, but they should be reputable as sources.
Magazines like New Scientist often profile scientists too, although my
subscription lapsed a few years back.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.0/639 - Release Date: 18/01/07 18:47