[WikiEN-l] The vexed issue of sources

[The Cunctator]

On 12/8/06, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > For an edit to be verifiable it has to be verifiable by someone other
> > than the person that made the edit. We're not talking about
> > reliability of sources - it's obvious that a TV show is a perfectly
> > reliable primary source - we're talking about whether someone else can
> > come along and check that what the original editor said is true
> > (assuming the source is right - a wikipedia article can never be more
> > reliable than the sources it uses). It's not necessary that everyone
> > be able to verify it, but a reasonable number of reasonably
> > unconnected people should be able to, otherwise we're open to any
> > number of hoaxes.
>
> In fact, the policy is even stronger. [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] says:
>
> ""Verifiable" in this context means that ***any reader*** should be
> able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been
> published by a reliable source." (emphasis mine)
>
> I'm not sure if I agree with that policy, but that's what the policy says.


I'm sure I don't agree with it. I worked on the verifiability policy a while
ago to get it to a rational place. Clearly *any reader* can't check every
source used on Wikipedia -- some people just don't have access to the
Widener Library, for example, or read French.


"Any reader" cannot verify that Cmdr. Pickett gets eaten by a Florgbernian
> Rumpox in Stargate episode 23 if said Stargate episode isn't publicly
> available for viewing.


We had been talking about commercially available, not publicly available.
Those are two different things.