QUOTE(Kurt M. Weber @ Sat 22nd March 2008, 5:52am)
You exist. Therefore, you are a worthy subject for inclusion.
The deletionist vandals will claim otherwise, but the fact of the matter is that anyone and anything that exists, is a legitimate article topic.
If you don't want an article on you, well, tough shit.
So here we have a brave new world where "anything that exists" - including, for example, Kurt M. Weber's sex life, presuming it exists - "is a legitimate article topic."…don't want one? Well, tough shit.
On the more cheerful side, I can write an article about my pet parakeet: he exists. How about the space three inches south of the northwest corner of my house, near the ceiling? It exists.
Reliable sources? No trouble. We can use people's own self-published material, I mean, for non-controversial about themselves, right? Or something only they would know. If you have a website, well, you're a public figure! So all I have to do is start a website on behalf of that parakeet, on behalf of that space. Website = "notable," right?
Of course, then, it's probably self-promotion. But if someone hostile to these things that exist wrote it…problem solved.
Stepping of reductio ad absurdum mode, the proposal that "anyone and anything that exists, is a legitimate article topic," is insane. Batshit insane. A panopticon, and dangerous.
This post has been edited by Proabivouac: