On 5/7/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As for Anthony's point that we should focus on
facts rather than
reactions, I agree; however, the facts, the interpretation, and their
relevance are all often in dispute. If you don't actually cite the
people making the claims directly in those cases, policies like NPOV,
verifiability, and "Original Research" will quickly be invoked by
those who'd rather not like to see certain facts mentioned in the
article at all. We turn opinions into facts by attributing them.
True. But at the same time, while I'm sure one could find 100 quotes
from celebrities who have called Howard Stern "disgusting", I'm not
sure any of them deserve mention in his Wikipedia article - maybe in
That said, I'm not sure where to draw the line. I guess I'm saying
that quoting a pure opinion, where that opinion doesn't naturally lead
in to some pertinent fact, tends to be extraneous. But I'd have to
think about that more.
(*) Maybe putting them all in Wikiquote and then mentioning that many
celebrities have called him "disgusting", pointing to Wikiquote as the
source, might make sense.