On 11/06/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm
<macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, English sources are preferred when available,
but Turkish ones are
perfectly acceptable for Turkish subjects. Policy doesn't force English
sources where they don't exist -that would be systematic bias.
...yes. But acceptability of sources can't magically make someone who
can't read Turkish able to tell if a given article is usable as a
"source" or not. Simply saying "there's lots of stuff in Turkish, some
of it could be usable" does not a source provide.
At the end of the day, the "sources" (a conceptually bad name, but
let's skip that) for an article have to be provided by someone who
knows what they're talking about, and is willing to think about the
matter for a while.
OK. Finding all the Turkish language material may not be enough to
provide the actual verification, but what we need is that the material
be verifiable. Verifiable is a somewhat lower standard than verified.
What we don't want is for people to use "I could only find Turkish
language material" as the sole excuse for deletion. Such an excuse has
the same level of brilliancy as "I've never heard of it."
Ec