On May 19, 2006, at 1:24 AM, Erik Moeller wrote:
Yes. And this is what we used to do before {{fact}} or
its synonyms
became widespread. I think that, because {{fact}} is so easy to tag
onto something, the practice of moving dubious claims may have
decreased somewhat in favor of tagging them. What can we practically
do to change this? I think policy alone will not be sufficient, given
how ubiquitous {{fact}} has already become.
Perhaps we need a new tag for claims which should be moved within n
days unless cited, with its own category for maintenancy. But that
might further increase the use of tagging as opposed to talk pages.
Curtailing the use of {{fact}} on dubious statements that are
unsourced or poorly sourced is what we are discussing. [[WP:LIVING]]
as recently updated by SlimVirgin, UninvitedCompany and others,
although not policy, cover this subject quite unambiguously:
"We must get the article right. Be very firm about high quality
references — particularly about details of personal lives. Unsourced
or poorly sourced negative material about living persons should be
removed immediately from both the article and the talk page."
Maybe it is time to consider upgrading [[WP:LIVING]] to policy status.
-- Jossi