73:
43:
A key problem is that somebody really needs to show that a source is reliable rather than expecting somebody show that it is not (i.e. it should be possible to show that it is reliable, but may not be possible to show that there is a lack of reliability). So I think that in this case you really need
39:
because the websites are not deemed authorative or to have a reliable publication process. This is a little difficult to "prove" one way or the other, but is largely based upon knowledge and perception of credibility. For example, the NY Times is well known as a reliable source of information and
34:"Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand."
40:
perhaps the NME for music, whereas a website that I set up yesterday to discuss music would, unless I am well known in the music world, have very little credibility as a reliable source.
134:
44:
to find some sources that are "obviously" credible, or you need to make a strong case to explain why the existing ones are credible.
138:
113:
126:
84:
80:
66:
62:
130:
29:
because the sources are not deemed reliable. I would suggest that they seem to fail the reliable sources test:
160:
52:
142:
150:
109:
156:
48:
22:
96:
95:
While all constructive contributions to
Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be
26:
164:
56:
149:
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the
21:
There did seem to be consensus that the label fails the test in
71:
137:
process can result in deletion without discussion, and
119:
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing
102:
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the
8:
108:notice, but please explain why in your
7:
153:of each individual file for details.
91:orphaned image, no encyclopedic use
97:deleted for any of several reasons
87:because of the following concern:
14:
122:{{proposed deletion/dated files}}
105:{{proposed deletion/dated files}}
81:File:N48609753 31761413 4190.jpg
67:File:N48609753 31761413 4190.jpg
47:Hope that helps a bit. Cheers
1:
141:allows discussion to reach
180:
165:01:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
133:exist. In particular, the
127:proposed deletion process
57:23:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
25:plus the basic test of
93:
76:
89:
85:proposed for deletion
75:
17:RE: Orchestral Colour
139:files for discussion
114:the file's talk page
131:deletion processes
77:
63:Proposed deletion
171:
154:
124:
123:
107:
106:
74:
179:
178:
174:
173:
172:
170:
169:
168:
148:
135:speedy deletion
121:
120:
104:
103:
72:
70:
19:
12:
11:
5:
177:
175:
145:for deletion.
125:will stop the
69:
60:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
176:
167:
166:
162:
158:
152:
146:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
117:
115:
111:
100:
98:
92:
88:
86:
82:
68:
64:
61:
59:
58:
54:
50:
45:
41:
37:
36:
35:
30:
28:
24:
16:
151:page history
147:
129:, but other
118:
110:edit summary
101:
94:
90:
78:
46:
42:
38:
33:
32:
31:
20:
157:FastilyBot
49:TigerShark
143:consensus
83:has been
79:The file
155:Thanks,
23:WP:CORP
112:or on
161:talk
53:talk
27:WP:N
65:of
163:)
116:.
99:.
55:)
159:(
51:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.