Bogdan Giusca wrote:
Thursday, January 25, 2007, 6:25:38 PM, Ken wrote:
WP:CITE and WP:RS are unreasonably easy to abuse
What you call "abuse", others call improval of the sourcing and of the verifiability, and of therefore the credibility of Wikipedia.
What you are supporting is a what-do-the-neighbors-think kind of credibility.
From my experience on Wikipedia, almost all the criticism on the Reliable Sources requirements comes from people who edit mostly articles on anime, webcomics, furry subculture, internet memes and the like.
I am critical of them but do not write about any of the subjects you note.
Those areas are not the core of an encyclopedia and protecting those areas should should not result in the compromising the rest of Wikipedia.
We can't have two sets of rules: one for cruft and one for the rest.
Your use of the word "cruft" suggests that your opinion is not unbiased
There are plenty of wikis for obscure stuff which fail our current policies on verifiability.
When was obscurity ever a criterion?
Ec