[WikiEN-l] insist on sources

[Stan Shebs]

Guettarda wrote:

>
>
>Actually there are times when leaving something as "common knowledge" is
>better than providing a source.  Recently there was a discussion at
>[[Evolution]] about a statement to the effect that evolution was considered
>to be responsible for the vast diversity of living things and whether to
>source that statement.  It's very easy to find someone who has said that,
>but to source it to anyone in particular could be misleading because it
>implies that there is some special relationship between the idea and the
>source.  If something is common knowledge it should only be sourced if the
>sourcing helps to establist the origin or development of the idea.  Just
>sticking in a source at random can be misleading.
>
Scientific papers manage this by citing common textbooks or well-known
survey-type monographs or articles, maybe even several of them to
emphasize the commonness of the knowledge; I don't think we can go
much wrong by following their example.

Stan