Phil Sandifer wrote:
In fact, I suspect we'd have an easier time getting historical out-of- universe information if we let people who knew stuff about the history of Pokemon write articles without demanding they go back and figure out where exactly they read every single fact they're trying to include.
I would have no issue with that except that it borders dangerously the issue of OR. How do I tell whether this stuff is real or made up? Is Wikipedia striving to be a reliable source of information or a buyer beware one. We already are a buyer beware one, with the existence of WP:CITE and WP:RS, so abolishing them won't get us anywhere different. Some people hope it will make us more reliable. I wish someone would sort this out, though, so that I could ignore my watchlist and go back to creating articles.