On Sep 29, 2006, at 12:34 PM, David Russell wrote:
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)
Baloney. MoS is a hellhole of process - exactly what Good Articles
were made to get around. Good Articles need to be pretty darn good -
not perfectly adhere to an absurd bit of process that grew
organically in a manner similar to kudzu.
- 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.
[[WP:CITE]] is unfollowable - both because it's impossible to edit
practically while citing a source every line, and because it's
another piece of crap MoS page.
-Phil