Phil, I don't want to defend RS, bcause I think it's a silly page, but I do defend V, which is the policy. I'm concerned about your attempts to rewrite RS given that you recently wanted to add material to an article using a post on a talk page, and I wondered if you could explain your position on that more fully.
My understanding is that the long-term professional partner of [[Dave Carter]], an American folk singer posted to the talk page of his article that he had sought a sex-change operation just before he died. This had not been published anywhere, not even on the partner's (Tracy Grammer's) own website.
You verified that it really was the partner who had made the post to the talk page, and proceeded to add it to the article. When you were reverted because you had no reliable published source, you said you had spoken to the Foundation who said you could add it. It turned out that you had spoken to User:Amgine, who subsequently posted that she wasn't in a position to speak on behalf of the Foundation, and was only giving a personal view.
You then said you'd spoken to Jimbo and that his advice was to add the material first to Wikinews, and then to use Wikinews as a source, which you did. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dave_Carter&diff=75998688&... This was also reverted, for the same reason: no reliable published source.
Can you explain why you think we should be able to use posts made on talk pages as sources? Do you think we should be able to use Wikinews as a sole source, given that anyone can edit it? Is it true that Jimbo thinks Wikinews should be used a source for Wikipedia?
I think if you could explain your views on this it would help to illuminate what the differences are between your position and that of the editors who support WP:V.
Sarah