> This list is essentially unsourced and because of the nature of these numbers being unpublished, will always be original research. Does not seem to be a notab

> This list is essentially unsourced and because of the nature of these numbers being unpublished, will always be original research. Does not seem to be a notable list. Seems like pretty good reasoning to me. The list is unsourced and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Plus it's not a notable topic, something I'd also agree with. Perhaps there ought to be a "wiki facts" website where such material could be published and editors could attempt to ascertain its validity and publish any facts that can be confirmed, even if not with typical encyclopedic quality sources.