Infogalactic talk:Notability

The scale seems focused on people and could do with examples of other categories, although the choice of examples could prove controversial.

For example, level 9 could be restated as:

9. A famous figure, entity or concept from history: Gaius Julius Caesar, the Roman empire, the Golden ratio.

It could probably do with a final statement that the examples are meant to be indicative, not exclusive.

OK, I just noticed that the title referred to people, so it seems like there are two ways to improve this:

1. Change it to Notability Examples, or
2. Add additional sections.

Crew (talk) 01:23, 19 September 2016 (CEST)

I think you're putting the "cart before the horse", so to speak, and instead of making examples, there should first be a clear, objective ruleset. Looking at the current example, though, I'm somehow reminded of the Kardashev scale, so I wrote up my interpretation of Notability based that, and the example list.

It's basically a scale based on the number of people that would likely deem it to be important to themselves, plus location. Out of pure narcissism, I'm going to call it the Ensata Scale of Fame/Notability.

The subject is known by or is important to the majority of the people within:

1. A neighbourhood or district of a city, or a small town.
2. A single city or several small towns.
3. A state or major subdivision of a country.
4. An entire country.
5. Several neighbouring countries.
6. One of the four corners of the world. (ie. Americas, Europe, Africa, or Asia/Oceania.)
7. More than one of the four corners of the world.
8. The entire world.
9. The Sol System.

To cover some other things, I also thought of modifiers based on other factors like time or relevance.

+1: The subject was significant to several generations of people, ie. approx. 100 years.

+2: Subject is significant across a significant part of human history, ie. 2000 years or more.

-1: The subject is important to a minority of people, but it follows the same level of spread.

-1: The subject is known only within one particular medium of communication.

-2: Subject is only important or useful to the people within the “-1” qualifier.

If I refine this later, I'll probably put it in a sandbox on my user space. Also, I think the use of Wikipedia as one of the scale indicators should obviously go.

Iris ensata (talk) 08:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Here's a list of examples using my objective ruleset - but mind you, this is my own interpretation of what you were trying to go for, for the reasons I said earlier.

1. List of Planetes episodes (+4 Country, -1 TV only, -2 highly esoteric), Midwest Buddhist Temple Taiko (+2 City, -1 esoteric), Abildsø

2. Wisconsin Highway 88, Ontario Highway 64, Most highways, WBNS (AM), most radio stations

3. Iris ensata (+5 Several countries, -2 highly esoteric), Dimitrios Soultanopoulos (+4 Country, -1 Sports only), Schaumburg Boomers, most sports teams

4. Pinolillo, Haggis, most national foods (either +4 or +4+1)

5. Red fox, Blue swallow, most animals

6. Euro, United States dollar, other major currencies (either a +6 or +5)

7. Genghis Khan (+6 Eurasia, +1 ~800 yrs old)

8. Sun Tzu (+6 Asia, +2 2500 yrs old), Julius Caesar (+6 Europe, +2 2000 yrs old)

9. Christianity (+7 America and Europe, +2 2000 yrs old), English language (+8 world, +1 200 yrs old)

10. Golden ratio, Any mathematical concept discovered in Ancient Greece (+8 entire world, +2 >2000yrs old)

11. The God-Emperor of Mankind

Iris ensata (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2016 (UTC)