|
|
|
|
|
by adamrezich
1421 days ago
|
|
but that's not how Wikipedia works. their policies don't care how popular or well-known someone or something is, what matters is whether or not journalists, news outlets, and other such groups (who must themselves be "notable") find them "notable" enough to cover. the Philip Roth story mentioned in the article is one such example of this—it's a good thing Mr. Roth worked at The New Yorker (a verified "notable" news outlet) so he could set the record straight about his own article, otherwise he would've been shit outta luck! it's really odd the degree to which Wikipedia's policies enshrine commercial journalism outlets as the Arbiters of Notability. |
|
It is somewhat of an irony that notability probably is bolstered more by fairly small run periodicals and books than it is by things like fan websites.