User talk:Kethrus/Archive/2015/December

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

What constitutes notability

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Kethrus

I have read the page on what constitutes notability. I wanted to check that if I could prove that John Wilcox developed the Woolmark that that would count as natability.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simontomp (talk • contribs) 11:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Simontomp: I don't think that's a claim to notability, as notability isn't usually inherited. Also remember that significant coverage on John Wilcox is needed, see WP:42. Please also remember to sign your messages with ~~~~ -- Kethrus |talk to me 12:09, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Kethrus, I don't understand what you mean by "inherited". I think you may have misread my question. What I was trying to say is that if John Wilcox can be shown to have developed the Woolmark would that constitute notability for him? I hope that is clearer. --Simontomp (talk) 12:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Simontomp: I didn't misread it. By "inherited" I mean just because they've worked on something notable, doesn't necessarily make them notable (See WP:NRV). They need significant, independent coverage from news/books/magazines/etc to be notable. -- Kethrus |talk to me 12:37, 5 October 2015 (UTC)