On 8/15/07, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 14/08/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Wikipedia is not a reliable source (specifically disclaimed); your logic, taken to its conclusion, would suggest that we cannot use negative incidents in our own edit histories as discussion fodder for RFAs.
Didn't we rehash this debate recently? A source can be generally unreliable and yet still reliable for the purposes of determining what it itself said...
I was trying to point out the absurdity of overextending BLP like this. I don't actually think that we should turn a blind eye to our own logs or edit histories...