On Dec 5, 2006, at 3:49 PM, wikien-l-request@Wikipedia.org wrote:
From: Ken Arromdee arromdee@rahul.net
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Puppy wrote:
Excellent solution, may I borrow your prod content for my own use?
Yes, but the case I'm worried about is one where the targeted article is not libelous or about living people, still would have content if the questionable material is removed, and actually does have sources, but which are not referenced in the recommended one-footnote-per-sentence way. The policy is letting people use the rules to disrupt by picking any of that 80% of articles and saying "you'd better source this, now, or I put your article up for deletion."
Nothing about the verifiability policy requires _inline_ sources.
And please stop asserting 80% of our articles are unsourced, when my informal check suggests that the number is more like 20%.