But we can note, if it is true, that it is not currently adopted by any authorities, that no tests of it have been done, and that it has been soundly ignored by experts in the field.
It's not easy to define what is or is not a "consensus" in a field (the lack of published controversy does not indicate consensus at all), people with a reasonable familiarity with the literature of a field can usually give a good sense of how something has been received or ignored or what-have-you.
I think the fact that this hasn't been taken up by any recognized experts in the subject is a verifiable fact, and telling enough for most people.
FF
On 3/21/06, Mikkerpikker mikkerpikker@gmail.com wrote:
We don't "prove" anything. We just take his claim out of the article.
Ryan
I think the point is we *can't* simply take the claim out because it satisfies [[WP:V]]. And since there are no rebuttals that does satisfy [[WP:V]] the article in question becomes POV by virtue of the fact that there are no views cited to challenge it. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l