Talk:Walter Ehrlich

Unreferenced tag
I have restored the tag because the article is unreferenced. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That tag was already present, and I didn't remove it. I'm fine with it being in the article. – sgeureka t•c 16:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphan tag
I have restored the tag because the article is an orphan. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It is usual for non-contemporary philosopher articles to be orphaned. I added the tag several months ago when notability was not established, but now that it is established, it doesn't matter anymore that he is ophaned (IMO). But why did you restore the notability tag? Him having an article on the de:wikipedia and having a long list of works surely establishes notability? (I don't know this philosopher, I'm just interested in this article because it is part of WP:SU where I once did much cleanup work.) – sgeureka t•c 16:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I can easily imagine the editors at de:wikipedia saying, in German, he's listed on en:wikipedia, so he must be notable... That's why having a listing in a wiki setting is not an indication of WP:NOTABILITY. How many books or articles one publishes is likewise not a criteria. Having multiple, third-party, reliable sources about the subject would do the trick, but there are zero sources. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 17:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, but what's the difference with the other hundreds (thousands?) of people stubs that User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg (i.e. SU) created that, in time, could, can and will establish notability? Also, see Articles for deletion/Walter Ehrlich. I am just not in favor of template madness (but I'll let this issue go as I won't improve the article to make the tags unjustified). – sgeureka t•c 17:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)