[WikiEN-l] "Reliable sources" guideline being treated as absolute policy

Thu Nov 30 17:21:20 UTC 2006

Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:04:27 -0700, Bryan Derksen
> <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>> But even then it's still not not a remotely _reliable_ diagnostic
>> factor. For example, if there were an article whose text consisted of:
>> "Marty McFoo was a German actor who won several national awards for his
>> portrayal of Julius Caesar on TV."
>> This article would be completely unreferenced, but nevertheless it
>> asserts the subject's notability just fine.
> 
> This is arse about face though. Marty McFoo is an actor who has played
> in some things[reliable source] which have been popular[reliable
> source] is unlikely to be tagged, whereas with no reliable sources it
> might well be (we have any number of deletion candidates which make
> vague unsubstantiated assertions, after all).

If it's tagged for speedy deletion then it's tagged incorrectly and the
tag should simply be removed. This is my basic point, which still
stands; speedy deletion is not applicable to articles that simply lack
sources. If I take the article you describe and make those [reliable
source] bits vanish that doesn't change the actual assertion of
notability one whit.

If you think the assertion of notability is false or otherwise not
sufficient to warrant keeping the article, that's what PROD and AfD are
for. Not speedy deletion.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20061130/4983fc45/attachment.pgp 