Following up on this:
I think the definition of 'celebrity' we adopt should be based on
present-day mass-media attention -- so typically entertainers,
politicians, sports people, royalty, mass murderers...
We already are up to our ears in people posting ordinary "I want to find anything I can about my person" questions, where the focus is on the specific person rather than on the genealogical problem that needs to be solved. With a celebrity as the subject, will it be even more tempting to focus on the person in the question, rather than the record set or needed research skill which the questioner doesn't know about?
When I first read the help and saw this set of guidelines for questions:
- Starting your research or improving your methodology
- Finding a source or understanding how to use it
- Documenting or presenting what you’ve learned
- Breaking down brick-walls in your family tree
- Using technology to support your research
... followed by the 'not about' list that included celebrity and biblical genealogy, I understood from context that the prohibition was intended to prevent the community's time from being wasted by drive-by people who were just nosy about famous figures and wanted someone else to do their homework for them. If people want to be genealogy paparazzi, let them do their own work.
My other question is: Are we willing for the site to become politicized? For an example: the "Resistance Genealogy" articles, shared via Twitter, where genealogists investigate the backgrounds of anti-immigrant politicians whose ancestors were themselves immigrants. Are we willing to host questions about a politician's grandfather, for instance, and the unpleasant consequences that might result?