[WikiEN-l] Defeat: Notability is Policy

[Anthony]

On Feb 3, 2008 10:09 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 03/02/2008, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
> > On Feb 3, 2008 8:28 AM, Todd Allen <toddmallen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > No one's going to challenge an article that cites a lot of
> > > sources, not even if it's a stub.
> > >
> > That statement is demonstrably false.
>
> Replace "sources" with "reliable, non-trivial, independent sources",
> and it's pretty much true.
>
Is it?  [[Daniel Brandt]] immediately to mind.  But then I looked at
AFD, because Brandt's article is obviously a nonstandard case.
[[January 2008 stock market volatility]] was the first article I
looked at.  30 sources.  Browsing up the list I also saw [[POLICEPAY]]
and [[Usher's fifth studio album]], and I didn't look at all that
many.  But I guess it depends how you want to interpret "reliable" and
"non-trivial".  If you take a narrow enough view of that, then I guess
the chances of having someone "challenge" such an article go down (but
still not to zero).  But then again, if you take a narrow enough view
of that, then sourcing an article well enough to please everyone
becomes a very tedious task for a great number of articles.  Hit
random page 5 or 10 times and see if you can come up with impeccable
sources for all of the articles, or if not if you can say with a
straight face that they should be deleted.