On 5/18/06, Rob <gamaliel8(a)gmail.com> wrote:
themselves. The most egregious example of this I've witnessed is the
removal of the Cheney/Leahy exchange (Dick_cheney#Rebuilding_of_Iraq)
on the grounds that it was temporarily unsourced. Does anyone
seriously doubt that this happened? Of course it's simple enough to
It's because WP:V is very vague on this one basic point. It defines what
should be the case. It is conspicuously tacit on what to do if it's not.
Delete? Remove temporarily? Hide? {{fact}}? Allow for a while? Hence my
suggestion to designate classes of articles with different rules for
unsourced material. FA's should not tolerate any unsourced material, for
instance.
the accuracy and neutrality of WP will suffer as a
result. I view the
{{fact}} tag as the equivalent of the {{hang on}] tag: don't delete
Not as a "I seriously question this" tag?
Steve