On 3/27/07, Cary Bass <cbass(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Furthermore, you are responding to my initial email which I have already
modified by saying that there were exceptiosn.
You are also ignoring the underlying issue in which the blogs being used
were not reliable sources, and were merely opinion pieces.
Blogs as sources are the exception and not the rule, and each needs to
be considered and weighed before it is used, and not after. Blogs are
generally unrelaible and non-notable and should not be used as reliable
sources.
So far you've stated that blogs should generally not be used as sources but
that there are exceptions. This is basically true, but when we go back to
the Barbara Bauer thing, we seem to be devided on the reliability of the
Writer Beware blog. Written by people with over 20 years of experience in
their line of work, and an extension of the website of a notable
organization in its field. That, to me, sounds like one of the exceptions.
Then there is for example, Malaysian politicians. If notable people blog,
their blogs are perfect sources to cite their opinions.
And then there's journalists who blog as part of their reporting (for
example the reporters of CBBC's Newsround in the UK).
They all seem to have in common that their reliability hinge on who's
writing it and if their opinion or report of events is relevant to the
article it is used in.
Basically they're no different than a regular website. Perhaps we should set
up a page where we help people determine the reliability of a blog. It avoid
blanket statements like "they're all non-notable" and they avoid people
using them without looking at them closely.
Do you agree with me so far, Cary?