Talk:Kristian Vilhelm Koren Schjelderup Jr.

"prominent liberal theologian"

Mr. Schjelderup's being "noted as a prominent liberal theologian" needs to be further sourced, and in general, this article needs more than one source for verifiability from reliable sources. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I know it does, and that one ref I found isn't the best way to do it. But I'm at work and can't check LexisNexis. Putting a notability tag up is probably best. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 17:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

References

A mention of a foreign language biography with no page numbers, references or links -- or even ISDN numbers -- is not even a source, much less a reliable source. Please do not add unsourced content again. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 22:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I think removal of a large chunk of text about a deceased person, text which is not controversial or potentially damaging, for the reason which you provide is quite inappropriate. The text should be reinstated and tagged with a reference request. That is quite sufficient. __meco (talk) 10:53, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree, it's ... well. It has no foundation in policy as far as I know. Punkmorten (talk) 14:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

So you're fine with an entire page of completely unreferenced content that can't be verified or even found anywhere? Go ahead and restore it. Don't expect me to, however. I've already tried to get some kind of reference in here and I'm tired of dealing with an author that describes adding tags for reference requests as vandalism. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 15:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I've restored it. __meco (talk) 15:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

If no references are found in a week, it's going to AfD, as it completely fails WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:N. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 17:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I have sent requests for information to the Royal Court of Norway via the national website to confirm the most glaring of the unsupported claims. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 20:53, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

What does the Royal Court have to do with this? Punkmorten (talk) 21:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

The Royal Court keeps a list of all appointments to the Order of St. Olav. If I can confirm that much is accurate and verified, then I can assume the rest is good. If that comes back as untrue, then I can proceed to start trying to verify the other claims in the article. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 22:14, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Is there any particular reason why in the first place you doubted the content of this article? After all, Wikipedia has hundreds of thousands of other articles similarly unreferenced claiming relatively innocuous facts. __meco (talk) 07:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The original author has done some, shall we say, factually challenged edits before, such as on David Irving. And whenever I do a search on someone and can't find a single reliable source, I typically hold that the article doesn't belong on WP. If there was even a good source that backed all this up, that'd be the end of it. But even on the Norweigian wp there isn't. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 19:48, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I added the sources. Happy Christmas, war is over. Punkmorten (talk) 09:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The Royal Court confirms he was awarded the Commander of St. Olav, personally, at the hands of the king. And the article is sourced, yay! (wanders off) -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 14:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Unverified issues

"In 1937 he founded Nansenskolen." Except that Nansenskolen has no mention of that, says it was founded in 1938, and the only founders I can find are Anna Henriette and Anders Wyller. Any links to back this up? -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 22:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved