On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 23 March 2012 17:20, Carcharoth
<carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:16 PM, David Gerard
<dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Who's Who might say "this guy is
notable", but the actual content is
> completely self-sourced. It's effectively a sponsored blog entry.
You miss my point. What I'm saying is that if
someone who *could* have
a Who's Who entry doesn't have one, then we should be asking why.
Oh yes, it's definitely missing articles list stuff. Agreed.
No, I'm not asking why those with Who's Who entries that lack
Wikipedia articles lack Wikipedia articles. I'm asking why those who
chose to opt out of Who's Who (by not sending in an entry) are not
allowed to opt out of Wikipedia. Sometimes the reasons for not wanting
to be publicly listed in a publication like Who's Who are the same as
for not wanting to be listed in Wikipedia.
Carcharoth