[WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

[charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com]

 "Thomas Dalton" wrote

> I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here - if you're suggesting
> the quote could replace the source for verification purposes, that's
> just asking for people to post fake quotes - that's not what you're
> saying, is it? 

Not at all. How do you get that? I'm not saying don't cite the source, I'm saying quote from the source as well. The two sentences out of the webpage you actually rely on, for example

>A well written article should make it perfectly clear
> what point is sourced from what citation without having to read the
> source. Also, all the relevant information from the source should be
> included in the article - that's the point of a source. So the quote
> would be redundant.

It's not always just about 'information'. 

> > Wikipedia's readers are not only academics, and we do not aim at academics. We aim at a treatment superior to almost all journalism, but we do not assume the reader has the academic resources available.
> 
> > Because our articles are not academic papers.
> 
> True, but I still think the conventions are just as appropriate on
> Wikipedia as they are in academia.

They are not. Because academics write for fellow academics, and we do not. Said that already, I believe ...

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information