3 ms·

The papers I have found were all proposals or investigations of the possibility of further research. You seemed to be saying there was actual research based on

The papers I have found were all proposals or investigations of the possibility of further research. You seemed to be saying there was actual research based on the incident, and I wondered if you had found something different. I assume you did not. Also, to directly quote the wikipedia page on Notability: "Notability is the property of being worthy of notice, having fame, or being considered to be of a high degree of interest, significance, or distinction."

dangrossman 14y ago
You're quoting the wrong notability page. "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
- waterlesscloud 14y ago
  Cutting the sentence off in the middle doesn't help your case. "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below". I also note the page has been marked for merging, so I'm hardly alone in my opinion.
  - dangrossman 14y ago
    Two mentions in any medium make a topic notable for Wikipedia purposes. This event's article cites 19. The "notability police" wouldn't go near it. Why do you think I'm "making a case", or would need to? This discussion effectively ended hours ago, it's only continuing to muck up the real discussion on this story because you feel compelled to argue with me for some reason. If you feel the need to continue, tweet me or something, this pointless back-and-forth doesn't belong on HN.
    - waterlesscloud 14y ago
      It does take two, you know. I'll make one final point and then let it go. If you want the last word, it's all yours. Two mentions in any medium is definitely not the standard for notability on wikipedia. Read the very page you linked for confirmation of that, there's quite a bit more about the standard there.

dangrossman 14y ago

You're quoting the wrong notability page. "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability

waterlesscloud 14y ago
Cutting the sentence off in the middle doesn't help your case. "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below". I also note the page has been marked for merging, so I'm hardly alone in my opinion.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  Two mentions in any medium make a topic notable for Wikipedia purposes. This event's article cites 19. The "notability police" wouldn't go near it. Why do you think I'm "making a case", or would need to? This discussion effectively ended hours ago, it's only continuing to muck up the real discussion on this story because you feel compelled to argue with me for some reason. If you feel the need to continue, tweet me or something, this pointless back-and-forth doesn't belong on HN.
  - waterlesscloud 14y ago
    It does take two, you know. I'll make one final point and then let it go. If you want the last word, it's all yours. Two mentions in any medium is definitely not the standard for notability on wikipedia. Read the very page you linked for confirmation of that, there's quite a bit more about the standard there.