On Apr 9, 2006, at 8:40 PM, wikien-l-request(a)Wikipedia.org wrote:
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 10:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Molu Bosu Palit <loom91(a)yahoo.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] A question about Wikipedia method
> To: WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
> Message-ID: <20060406171753.2281.qmail(a)web32104.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> I have this question about Wikipedia method. If I see cntent that
> I know for CERTAIN to be true, but the content does not cite a
> verifiable source and I also know of none, then should I keep the
> content or should I remove it? Thank you.
>
> Molu
Neither. If you're sure the content is true, then you should not be
in a rush to remove it, but if nobody has found a verifiable source,
then the reader should be specifically alerted to this problem.
So, tag it with a {{fact}} tag (which displays as a superscript
"Citation needed.") Wait a while and see if anyone can find a
verifiable source. Continue to try to find a verifiable source yourself.
If, after what you consider to be a reasonable amount of time, nobody
has come up with a source, then do not simply remove it, cut it from
the article, but paste it into the talk page and explain both that a)
you're removing it because nobody could find a source for it, but b)
you personally are sure that it is true. Give your reasons for
thinking it's true. Giving a good explanation may help someone else
find a source. For example, if you say "I think I read it in the
Boston Globe," then since my local public library happens to give me
access to a database with the full text of the Boston Globe back to
about 1980, I might be able to find a source even if you, without
such access, can't.
