On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:46 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 13/03/2008, Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:40 AM, White Cat
<wikipedia.kawaii.neko(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Reliable sources? For an episode? Let me
think how can we get that... Hmm...
> Hmm... Oh RIGHT! How about the episode itself? Its quite reliable and
> verifiable. Each time you watch it it is the same story, same plot.
That is not a reliable, independent, secondary
source.
And sourcing is not a bureaucratic checklist. The source text being
discussed is obviously relevant to an article and, if objectively
checkable, certainly citable.
- d.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
While true, it is not in itself sufficient for an article.
Independent, reliable, secondary sources decide if a subject is
significant enough to write a significant amount on. If they say no,
we follow suit and say no, and make a quick entry on a list. We don't
second-guess them. Though the list entry can certainly cite the
primary source.
--
Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows.