Timeline for Do we need to clarify what we mean with "famous persons" on our ask/on-topic help page?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 2021 at 9:45 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | Perhaps a better example than the TikTok hyperbole: A respected mainstream climate scientist (& Donaldist ;) of nobility shares this exclusive name with a prominent right-wing anti-climate politician in parliament; how come? His nephew married the politician (making for fun family festivities when sharing a table while weather extremes colour the outside landscape in unusual ways…). That's where I would see relevancy (but still too recent for this site). | |
| Jul 26, 2021 at 9:31 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | Indeed, "where's the line" to current events — i.e.: not history? // I'd question the relevancy, the topical field of inquiry, and the 'too recent' angle. // However, the wife seems indeed to be a 'known' journalist, and Andrew Wakefield is not a "random film maker", but a highly controversial figure, ex-doc, license revoked, quite influential with now retracted studies… — that all three are somehow (in-)'famous' isn't the point I'd argue against. But what's the historical relevancy for this thin air assumption that sharing a common last name means, well, what? Agreed to 2nd para. | |
| Jul 26, 2021 at 9:13 | history | edited | SemaphoreMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 512 characters in body
|
| Jul 26, 2021 at 9:07 | history | answered | SemaphoreMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |