Talk:Media Data Extended

Notability template
I think the reason the template is there is a valid one, as the references don't seem to satisfy WP:GNG, as the first three are from the company that created the format, making them primary sources, and the fourth reference isn't enough to solidly establish the notability of the subject. The article does require multiple reliable third-party references, and at the moment this article doesn't have that. This is why I agree with the template and restored it in the article, and would ask for discussion before removing it again. Thank you. - SudoGhost 06:39, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you too. Do I need to say that it is exactly what I though? Fleet Command (talk) 11:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * @SudoGhost: I appreciate that you provide arguments (unlike some other users here). I respect that and will leave the template I had previously removed. --85.127.218.223 (talk) 07:33, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What I don't understand: What does "notability" (the question whether or not a topic merits a wiki page) have to do with the wiki article citing sources? If there are no references, they should be added. That does not mean the article is not noteworthy. Imagine - just for the sake of argument - an article about "George Bush" lacking references. It would not mean the article topic is not noteworthy. --85.127.218.223 (talk) 07:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If an article about "George Bush" fail to supply citations from multiple reliable secondary sources, we will delete it without flinching, especially since George Bush is a matter of BLP! That's how Wikipedia works. If Media Data Extender is not yet deleted, that is because no one has reported it yet. I normally don't report articles for deletion. Make sure you read WP:GNG. Fleet Command (talk) 14:11, 20 September 2011 (UTC)