I strongly oppose the proposal that providing sources
is *immediately*
mandatory for every new fact added to an article. This would raise the
amount of effort needed to add content, and would cut out large
amounts of
legitimate,
useful contributions.
Large amounts? I'm sure it would be more than 90%, and may be as high
as 98 on 99%. Someone should really determine this empirically: what
proportion of edits containing new information do not contain
references to back them up?
Steve