It very often happens on Wikipedia that articles on subjects of minimal importance are inflated with laundry lists of minor factoids. Their inclusion is then defended with an argument along the lines of: "Well, our article on Albert Einstein includes all these details, so this article should, too."

This is a variation on a number of similar misunderstandings such as What about article X? and falls afoul of one of the principles of Wikipedia, that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate source of information. The life story of Einstein, such as the fact that he worked as a patent clerk after being the only graduate from his class not to be offered a teaching post, is discussed in great detail in a large number of books, as being an important factor in what led him to his papers of the annus mirabilis of 1905. To invoke Einstein as justification for inclusion of minor self-sourced data for some marginally important scientist whose work, while interesting, falls a long way short of the theory of relativity, is not really on. It looks a lot like a résumé.

See also edit