Talk:Manoly Lascaris

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Australia

	Australia portal Manoly Lascaris is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Comments

If he was not notable, why was he given an obituary in the Sydney Morning Herald? Intelligent Mr Toad 11:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention the Guardian--Totorotroll (talk) 08:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't dispute his notability either. However, it does raise the issue of how we deal with people who are known for precisely one thing - their association with another person who gained notability through accomplishments, achievements etc. I'm not saying Manoly never did anything, but were it not for Patrick White, whatever he did would not be written about and he would not even be a footnote to history. I've just nominated Category:Spouses of Australian politicians for deletion on the grounds that notability is not gained by marriage or association (except in some very specific cases; First Ladies, royal consorts, spouses of Australian Prime Ministers, etc). I'm trying to reconcile in my own mind how I can argue for that deletion, while simultaneously arguing to keep Manoly Lascaris. Can anyone help me here? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 04:51, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The idea that notable people whose notability is linked to one thing are somehow not notable is a purely Wikipedia invention, and it's always been a bizarre one. As I recall, the original policy was created to deal with people who were genuinely not notable but had one dubious claim (i.e. subjects of internet memes); that it is taken so far that we're arguing about a well known figure who had an obituary in the Sydney Morning Herald is the sort of silliness only Wikipedia can do. Rebecca (talk) 14:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Manoly Lascaris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090912080318/http://www.brandl.com.au/Books/Lascaris/lascaris.html to http://www.brandl.com.au/Books/Lascaris/lascaris.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:47, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]