On 12/13/05, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 12/13/05, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/13/05, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
At least a month is better than forever, but I think a month is too long to be manageable.
I believe it's about the same amount of time we give suspected copyright infringements.
Suspected copyright infringements is a completely different situation, though, because it invariably *requires* discussion. That something is not a copyright infringement cannot be easily proven, if at all. That something has a citation in it can be easily proven.
That isn't the right question. It's not whether somehting is *verified*, it's whether it's *verifiable*. It's wiki. Lack of references (as in the very earliest version of the article Oxygen, see the addendum to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oxygen&oldid=271622) can be solved by editing. It can never be solved by deletion, which should be reserved for articles that seem, after an honest effort has failed, to be unverifiable.
How about this: we list pages there for a month, but after 24 hours the article gets moved to the user's subpage. And let's add this: an article doesn't get moved, even after 24 hours, unless a member of the "article referencing team" (or whatever) says that s/he has spent a few minutes looking for a source and failed. If no one bothers to make a good faith search effort, the article stays in article space for up to a month.
No need to userfy. Just add an "unreferenced" tag. This has the advantage of permitting casual visitors to find and improve the article.
I find the unreferenced tag to be useless. Either it says that the article contains some unreferenced facts, in which case we'd be better off tagging those few articles which don't contain unreferenced facts with the opposite tag, or it says that the article contains zero references, which is already evident to anyone scanning the article anyway.
If you want to put the tag on the talk page or use a category, in the case of articles with absolutely no references, I wouldn't object. But I don't think that is a solution for what I'm saying, which is that we shouldn't be creating such articles in the first place.
Anthony _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l