There is a different kind of 'reliability theory' which is used in Epistemology. Roughly it concerns the relation of testimony (or attestation) to truth. Anybody knows enough about it to write a bit more? --Sascha.leib 12:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Jafeluv (talk) 07:55, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure why the main article for reliability is a disambig page. When reliability is spoken of, it virtually always means the probabilistic sense which is outlined here, and all/most of the disambig articles refer to. I would do some work on the disambig page itself, but it doesn't appear to be editable??? I suggest we move this article to reliability, leave a redirect, and rework the disambiguation page, if it's even necessary. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:33, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Comment the disambiguation page says "Reliability theory, as a theoretical concept, to explain biological aging and species longevity" which is not what this page says... 22.214.171.124 (talk) 05:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Oppose it is usually spoken about in this manner, but rather about a characteristic of a person's persona, which is not what is outlined in this article. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 05:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Anthony Appleyard. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.