i am wondering what is the notability of de waal to include him in a dozen articles as the sole source for a claim has he written anything other than that work in journals or other peer reviewed publications about those specific years of history so i concur with vartan and any neutral user can't do otherwise when de waal has been used more than his notability would allow as sole source in countless articles as he is a sole source he can therefore be considered as having fringe position and removed unless grandmaster or atabek have any other works substantiating the personal opinions of de waal who supports fringe positions in various issues including shushi or the armenian genocide the fact that he presents the armenian genocide as an armenian position and compares it to a fabrication of the s of an alleged million azeri exterminated by armenians alone would be enough to dismiss his position for that particular period of history i'm afraid this time around the adding of de waal has reached the limit this is not de waal encyclopaedia to have his position on everything especially when he is the sole source for the position he represents