Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intensional statement
By 2004 Wikipedia standards, the article actually handles a notable, if an obscure and conceptually rather difficult, topic fairly well - even the lack of references was acceptable by the standards of that time, provided the article was fairly non-controversial. The problem is that the nature of the topic and the small number of inward links has resulted in the article not getting any substantial attention since then, and it has not been updated in line with our current checklist of standards. Even the article as it stands is almost certainly sourceable, though possibly with some difficulty - it corresponds closely, right down to the specific examples, with what I remember being taught about the topic as a philosophy student in about 1977, and while I rather wonder whether the article creator was using lecture notes of a similar vintage, the same material will have been somewhere in the background reading lists for that part of the course. If I can easily find some relevant sources in my remaining philosophy books, I will add them to the article, but even if I can't, they should still be available in a sufficiently good university library. Of course, the ones I remember will be fairly old (though I would point out |notability is not temporary) - but the standard GBooks search comes up with quite a number of more recent reliable sources for a more up to date article, particularly if the search is expanded to the effectively synonymous ''intensional sentence'' and ''intensional proposition
— User:PWilkinson, 12:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NTEMP (Wikipedia:Notability)