Slim Virgin wrote
WP:V is supported by WP:NOR, a longstanding,
established policy. The
only way to show you're not doing OR is to produce a reliable source.
If you can't produce one, your edit may be removed, because OR is
never allowed.
Yes, but this doesn't override some other things, like trying to get
consensus.
If we ever get into a situation where lots of editors
are using NOR
and V as an excuse to run around removing unsourced edits, where the
material has been published elsewhere and isn't controversial, but
those wanting to retain it are mysteriously unable to cite a source,
then we can revisit the issue. But currently, that isn't happening
(and how could it?) so it looks as though you're trying to create a
problem where none exists.
Well, I hope people really are behaving well, all over the site. I don't
see how anyone can be that confident.
It is like it has been said: the slope of allowing the most fiercely
contested articles set the policy is extremely slippery. Cutting before
querying on Talk 'and do you have a source for that?' is still bad practice
(still cuts across 'assume good faith', for example).
Charles