On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:38:06 -0400, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
Then it shouldn't be any problem to source it...?
Exactly. Shouldn't that be preferable to deleting it?
"There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative "I heard it somewhere" pseudo information is to be tagged with a "needs a cite" tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons." - Jimmy Wales.
Sure, adequately sourcing it is preferable, but if it's a choice between waiting for a source or removing it, removing is a better option. Even if you put it back in with a source ten minutes later.
Guy (JzG)