Jimmy Wales wrote:
Geoff Burling wrote:
I'm wondering if the proper crieria for inclusion/exclusion is the fact that any theory, beit mainstream, minority or other, is whether or not it is available in print.
I think that's a very valid way to look at it, yes, absolutely.
It's still only one of several possible criteria to consider.
I'm sorry, but a post to Usenet or a statement on a webpage just isn't convincing enough for little old me.
That's right, although I can imagine some hypertechnical sticklers abusing this notion. Some facts can be found more or less only online, particular facts about contemporary Internet culture. Who is the current maintainer of BIND? Probably that isn't in a book, but it's an uncontroversial fact that could be looked up online.
It too is another fact to be considered.
There will always be borderline cases. In cases of doubt and uncertainty, I would give the benefit of the doubt to inclusion. If the science is really that bad, it will still have value as comic relief.
Ec