-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Mak wrote:
It shouldn't need an inline citation, because all the major sources agree on it.
But since practically no-one on-wiki is an expert on 16th century Italian music, they insist on inline citations, so that someone could potentially go "check" that "fact". I think inline citations can be very important, but I don't think every single factual assertion in an article should have to have an inline citation, especially when an article really is simply echoing accepted non-controversial scholarship, such as, for instance, [[Dido and Aeneas]], which just received a GA review request for inline citations. It's getting ridiculous.
First of all, if 'all the major sources agree on' a particular fact, then where is the problem in citing one of them? Good Articles need to demonstrate compliance with the Manual of Style at the very least (if not all the other various guidelines on different issue) - and if people had followed [[WP:CITE]] in the first place then there wouldn't be the problem with the GA review, would there? It's not as if it is a brand new guideline that may be under dispute or unknown - WP:CITE has been around since 2002, if some editors decided to ignore it then it's no surprise that others objected to their work being elevated to GA status.
Cynical