On 01/12/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:04:27 -0700, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
Indeed. Absence of any claim to validity is what is at issue, and the absence of any sources is one of the diagnostic factors. very few sourced articles are flagged for A7.
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).
Of course we now get so far into wiki-lawyering that we have to explicitly say that things are "popular" enough to get into the "popularity" based wikipedia.
Peter Ansell