Bryan Derksen wrote:
Cheney Shill wrote:
At this point, there seem to be 2 reasonable
alternatives:
1) Create a time limited deletion warning permitting
deletion upon expiration without reliable sources.
2) Create an indefinite banner that clearly states that the
article/section is in a highly unreliable state should not
regarded as accurate.
I've got no problem with the banner approach, though I think
"highly"
might be overstating the issue.
I agree with this and with the same reservation. "May be unreliable"
would say enough, and leaves open the possibility that there may be
nothing wrong with the article at all, save the lack of sources.
Ec