User talk:Kethrus/Archive/2015/December
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Kethrus. 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
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)