On 3/2/06, jayjg <jayjg99(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Well, I'm not advocating deleting everything in
Wikipedia that doesn't have
a citation from a reliable source beside it. However, the instant someone
says "I don't think this statement is true or factual", then you do have
to
produce a verifiable citation from a reliable source to back it up.
Which is exactly what I've been arguing for. Contested, unsourced
citations should be dealt with.
Which is basically what the current policy says.
Unfortunately not.
"Sometimes a statement can only be found in a publication of dubious
reliability, such as a tabloid newspaper. If the statement is
relatively unimportant, remove it."
"If an article topic has no reputable sources, Wikipedia should not
have an article on that topic. Any edit lacking a source may be
removed, but some editors may object if you remove large tracts of
Wikipedia without first giving people a chance to provide references
to support their inclusion."
It's hinted at...but my word there is a lot of crud in WP:V at the
moment. There are actually two distinct summaries of the policy as
well. Eep.
Steve