Mark Richards wrote:
Yes, anything verifiable and factual should.
'Notable'
is just someones POV about what they think is
important.
I think you inclusionist folks severely underestimate just how much
ridiculous stuff is verifiable and factual. I could start typing in
entries for everyone who died in Atlanta each die, using the obituary
section of the local newspaper as a source, and these are verifiable
and factual. There are plenty of "human interest" stories published
in the paper, like "family dog saves baby from drowning!". These are
verifiable and factual (verifiable in the newspaper's archives), but
not notable.
How many instances can you cite of culling obituaries for material, or
family dog stories? It seems pointless to generate arguments for the
rejection of articles that nobody has written.
Ec