You don't even need question 2. Original research isn't verifiable by reference to
reputable sources, so if you answer Yes to question 2 you must necessarily answer No to
question 1.
Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 1/30/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
1. Is the information verifiable?
2. Does the article contain original research?
3. Does the article cite sources?
4. Is the information presented in the article useful and of an
encyclopedic nature?
5. Is this whole mess driving good editors from the project?
If you answered "Yes", "No", "Yes", "Yes" and
"Yes", Congratulations!
Please speedy keep the article and block those who persistantly disrupt
the project by their lack of common sense.
If you're still talking about [[List of state-named Avenues in
Washington, D.C.]], it's not of an encyclopedic nature. It's not even
an article, it's a list. Lists have to be treated differently, that's
why there used to be "Lists for Deletion", but Wikipedia wasn't big
enough to handle such a minor issue on a separate page, so it was
merged into VFD. In hindsight, the merge was a mistake.
Anthony
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail