Talk:Alexander Muse

Searches
What is the threshold for including individuals in Wikipedia? This person doesn't seem particularly newsworthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.97.124 (talk) 06:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

This page screams vanity page! Smucoxmus (talk) 15:33, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Removal of sentence about lawsuits and Wikipedia
I removed a sentence talking about some lawsuits and the fact that the subject has a Wikipedia page. The second point is a canonical example of redundancy and doesn't belong in an article. Discussion of lawsuits is a little bit more problematic. There were several sources. Three of which were behind a pay wall which is not prohibited but limits my ability to comment on them in detail. In general, we need to remember that a lawsuit, at its core is an allegation. There are times that a lawsuit, when settled, may be relevant to an article. This isn't necessarily sufficient, as the subject matter should be material, should relate to the subject in other than a trivial way and should be discussed at some level of detail, beyond mere mention, in reliable sources. A lawsuit that is not yet been settled requires a more significant hurdle. It may be relevant if substantially discussed in reliable sources. In my opinion, it looked to me like someone simply did a search identify the name in connection with some lawsuits, in some cases just barely connected, and through in a sentence with some references. I'm not suggesting that any mention is prohibited but I think it deserves more thoughtful editorial discussion than simply scraping a few references in slapping them into a sentence.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  23:27, 13 November 2016 (UTC)