User talk:Chris is me/Notability hurts

Improper category
Is there any reason why this userbox tags people in the "Wikipedians against notability" category? That is not what the box says at all. I am having to remove it from my userpage as it has already given some users the wrong impression. 23skidoo 22:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It's called "Notability hurts". — Randall Bart 04:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, the classification is terrible. It's completely different than what the userbox says. I'm FOR notability. I agree with notability as a criteria for inclusion in wikipedia. I'm opposed to popularity contests. Articles such as every single Simpsons episode get added to wikipedia because of their popularity, and cannot be effectively deleted, again because of their popularity, but according to wikipedia guidelines they FAIL the notability test: each individual episode is not significant. That's just one example. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant. The point is that you can agree with what the userbox appears to be saying without opposing the notability requirement. I don't like being in the category "Wikipedians AGAINST notability", either TheBilly (talk) 10:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't mind as I am increasingly finding "notability" a poor reason for considering articles for inclusion per Diderot: "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 18:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)