slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/7/05, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.org wrote:
We don't have the resources to do any of this, which is why we rely on sources that do. Usenet isn't one of them.
That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. However, it is not Wikipedia policy.
Sean, I've asked three or four times if anyone can point me to any part of Wikipedia policy that states or implies that Usenet is an acceptable source, and so far, no one has done so. My understanding of the policy pages (e.g. WP:NOR) is that it's not, and I sent you a link to the section that seems to back me up. It doesn't mention Usenet explicitly, but the description of what type of source is acceptable would definitely exclude it. I'd say you're the one operating on the basis of your opinion only, not me. But if I'm wrong, show me.
Apparently the page is not as clear as it could be then, because I read WP:NOR to mean exactly the opposite of your interpretation.
Why don't you try adding "For instance, Usenet is never a valid secondary source" to the page and see how that goes? I think everybody on the mailing list understands everybody else's position by now, even if they don't agree with it; let's write it up for the benefit of future editors.
Stan