Talk:Davidsbündler

Notable?

Ping User:Toughpigs who removed the notability tag. Did you check the sources listed? Did you find in-depth coverage in any of them? My search shows one in-depth source - in a 19th century work. If you see anything better, please comment here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are already sources written on the page. They are offline sources, and therefore not accessible to you right now. If you have a problem with those sources, then you should go and look them up before you assume that they are insufficient. I don't think it's a good idea to go around putting a notability tag on any random article that doesn't have immediately accessible online sources. -- Toughpigs (talk) 05:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is the article's creator responsibility to demonstrate notability beyond any doubt. The citation templates support, among others, a quote parameter for a reason. Since this article does not clearly demonstrate notability, a tag is warranted. A tag is not saying 'this is not notable', it clearly says 'it may not be notable', inviting others to fix it by proving it is through better sourcing/expansion. As such, please don't remove it unless you can show that notability exists, instead of just saying 'there are sources I have not read which may be good". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]