You know, it's not that damn critical to have people include sources when
they add something to Wikipedia. In my experience, 99% of the time a quick
google finds a source for info (that isn't just obvious opinion).
It's not that big a deal.
On 11/28/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I see no reason why we should be flexible about sources. If it hasn't got
sources it can be deleted, regardless whether this is a policy or a
guideline. It may be kept if someone bothers to find the sources the
author
should have included, but that might not happen.
The only way to make people use sources is hammering it in, because no
matter how many times it is said, people will ignore it. Perhaps deletion
will get some backsides into gear.
Mgm
On 11/28/06, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/28/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That wording seems to change from day to day.
I'm not sure where the
discussion about its wording is held. For a while it insisted on
copyright violations. Sometimes it mentions nonsense, sometimes it
does. Sometimes it says "may be deleted", other times it's
"will".
It's in [[MediaWiki:Newarticletext]]. There may be some discussion on
the talk page there.
--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l