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

[Rob Smith]

On 11/28/06, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com
<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I noticed this too. But I tend to assume that these messages are like health warnings on cigarette packets: they become more extreme, because the moderate versions are ignored by the people they are really aimed at.
>
> We may need to audit deletions. I'm becoming uneasy about the quick paths. But a great deal of discretionary deletion does need to happen.
>
> Charles
>

What about were a systematic effort to remove sources is underway?  As
in this article

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Coe&diff=next&oldid=34386640

same occurred again

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Coe&diff=39262981&oldid=39262903

Charles added the needs sources Template months later

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Coe&diff=next&oldid=44966881

Does anyone look at the histories before nominating for deletion?  I
could cite a couple of dozen similiar examples.

Nobs01