Talk:Voting theorist: Difference between revisions
→Potentials to add
(→Potentials to add: - I'm fine with being more inclusive, but do we have an objective means of rejecting people from the list?) |
Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 28:
::: I'm okay with being more generous than [[English Wikipedia]] when it comes to notability, and I'm okay with this list. As you might have seen, we didn't (yet) have a page for [[Kenneth Arrow]] before today. Now we do. I'm not sure how we qualify people to go on the list, other than "''this person seems to know what they are talking about''". Do we have an objective means of rejecting people from the list? -- [[User:RobLa|RobLa]] ([[User talk:RobLa|talk]])
:::: [[User:RobLa|RobLa]] How about we use the requirement that they are an inventor/developer of something which is itself worthy of a page? This implies that they have contributed to the field and are not just well versed in the field. Is that a reasonable criteria for notability? I do not think that being on this list should imply that they are notable enough for their own page. --[[User:Dr. Edmonds|Dr. Edmonds]] ([[User talk:Dr. Edmonds|talk]]) 07:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
| |||