Difference between revisions 99247185 and 100129940 on enwiki

There is a history of dispute with respect to the article, which can be traced from it's previous location ([[hypernumber]]), in the [[Talk:Hypernumber|talk]] page. Ignoring all the references that I gave (most of them formally published) and replacing them with a single reference to a single-user-maintained religious web site is inacceptable to me, therefore I resurrected the deleted content here as a first step. Maybe the new location, [[Musean hypernumber]], is more acceptable for the time being. Je(contracted; show full)
:Hopefully the above outlines and supports notability. Please let me know if you have any suggestions on how certain concerns could be accomodated. I still have to incorporate feedback (see above) into the article, and hope to have it updated by the end of January.
:Thanks, Jens [[User:Koeplinger|Koeplinger]] 00:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
::
:As explained [[Wikipedia:Notability|here]], the notability of a topic is judged by the scope of attention that the topic has received, not the way that the article is written. There is no rush, but it might be helpful if you add some of the above references, especially to any books or articles that have apeared in print, but even to preprints or external links to web sites.  You are free to add references to your own papers, if they are in peer-reviewed journals; having three instead of two authors would help illustrate that the topic has been studied somewhat broadly. My subjective opinion is that this topic appears to be notable by WP standards, but it would be more convincing if the reference list was more broad. [[User:CMummert|CMummert]] 03:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)⏎
:::Thanks a lot for your detailed response. I'll incorporate the suggestions. Target date is end of January, time permitting. Thanks, Jens [[User:Koeplinger|Koeplinger]] 01:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)