On Dec 14, 2007 4:38 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 14/12/2007, Relata Refero refero.relata@gmail.com wrote:
One problem: an article there'll probably have to be viewed as a self-published source; I don't see Google claiming to exercise any editorial control. WP:V might see a few disagreements as people try to alter it to allow reliance on free, signed content.
If the writer's an acknowledged authority in the field, that shouldn't be a problem.
Oh, I agree it shouldn't. But WP:V has the line "However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so", which clearly suggests we should try and avoid signed but self-published articles even by acknowledged experts. In effect, this is going to be similar to, for example, archives of unpublished 'working papers' or university websites' freely available lecture transcripts. They're around, accessible, free, and written by experts, but we don't like using them for some reason.
RR