On 10/15/06, Oskar Sigvardsson <oskarsigvardsson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/5/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com>
wrote:
In general, I find the {{fact}} tagging to be
overdone in Wikipedia. A
better option is to nuke the unsourced material. Sometimes {{fact}} is
warranted, I don't mean that it is always a bad idea. But it is overdone.
I very often see completely preposterous claims tagged with {{fact}},
usually because an editor is being excessively cautious. Be bold. :)
--Jimbo
I agree, but in this case summarily removing all of the unsourced
statements will result in a revert, or a revert war. If you place
{{fact}} on all of the statements instead, it is much easier to delete
them a week from now.
Yes, until there is a rule that unsourced statements may be removed
immediately (which I would favor), using the {{fact}} tag for a week
or so seems to be the best solution for statements which a) are fairly
harmless if false, and b) might very well be true.
Now what would be nice is to have a way to keep track of this sort of
thing so that within a week or so something is done to address the
situation. But short of having someone code something up (someone was
working on a mediawiki "tasks" feature which would probably work
perfectly for this sort of thing), I'm afraid this would lead to too
much instruction creep.
Anthony