User:Avb/sandbox

The problem with borderline notability -- On weight and biased sources
Borderline notability makes writing a neutral bio difficult and often impossible due to a paucity of neutral, balanced biographical information in e.g. the media. As with all articles, we should adhere to the non-negotiable NPOV principle. We have to assess the weight we're giving to the various aspects of the subject based on the weight given by the sources we deem V RS for the subject. Example: the question whether or not we should mention someone's sexual orientation and what we should say about it if we mention it. That question is not primarily answered by means of editor discretion, consensus, e.g. arguing that sexual orientation in WP defaults to heterosexual. We should follow the sources. Once we have studied the sources, we have some leeway: common sense, editorial decisions and consensus all play an additional role, for example when the sources are not all that clear on what they deem (or do not deem) important. But if most of the sources are fixated on sexual orientation, and provide very little information other aspects of the subject's life, it would be perverse not to elaborate on it in the article.

The problem in a nutshell -- the friction between:


 * Notability based on biased sources
 * Common sense trying to offset the bias in the sources
 * WP:WEIGHT (NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source)

This fundamental problem is the main reason why I prefer not to have articles about subjects whose lives have not received balanced coverage in V RS sources, so that following WP:WEIGHT will result in an article that greatly overemphasizes certain aspects of the subject's life. This may repeat as most editors won't like the overemphasis.

The subject may wish to have a WP biography removed, or certain aspects of it given a different weight. This may be reasonable, especially when caused by our reliance on biased sources. If so, we can put the article through AfD in order to choose between (1) deleting the article; or (2) bending WP:WEIGHT and WP:NOR by adjusting the content to what we, the editors, deem more neutral. The latter will lead to difficult consensus discussions, not supported by the sources and/or policies/guidelines/community standards, but based on the editors' own (sometimes irreconcilable) preconceptions about what is and isn't neutral in the context of the subject's life.