| Revision as of 21:44, 8 January 2009 editWuhwuzdat (talk | contribs)56,587 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:36, 9 January 2009 edit undoRocksanddirt (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers5,954 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| It would appear that Mr Kemp is currently in the midst of an extensive rewrite of his own biographic article.. ] (]) 21:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC) | It would appear that Mr Kemp is currently in the midst of an extensive rewrite of his own biographic article.. ] (]) 21:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ==encyclopedic notability== | |||
| Even as a published author, I'm not feel'n it. and may propose this for deletion in a couple of days. --] (]) 00:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==Sources== | |||
| The sources used mostly don't seem to be ]. I removed a few things that were clearly not good sources, marked a few places that need sources. | |||
| Mr. Kemps blog and books are only good for his opinion and response to things, not as facts for the article. | |||
| --] (]) 00:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:36, 9 January 2009
The link I posted in "External Links" is by an amateur Portuguese historian with the same academic credentials in this field as Arthur Kemp.
It would appear that Mr Kemp is currently in the midst of an extensive rewrite of his own biographic article.. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
encyclopedic notability
Even as a published author, I'm not feel'n it. and may propose this for deletion in a couple of days. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Sources
The sources used mostly don't seem to be reliable sources. I removed a few things that were clearly not good sources, marked a few places that need sources.
Mr. Kemps blog and books are only good for his opinion and response to things, not as facts for the article. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)