Yes but in written sources you have just that - a written record of what was said and who said it. That is the difference in credibility between an official press release by the airport and you phoning up some bozo in the airport's customer services department
Cynical
Keith D. Tyler wrote:
Stan Shebs wrote:
Keith D. Tyler wrote:
- I call Boeing Field on the phone and ask them how many planes fly in and out
every day.
Thanks, but no thanks. This has all kinds of verifiability problem - who answers the phone? Are they working from records, or BSing you from memory so as to get you to hang up and stop bothering them? What if I call them later, and get a different answer; do I delete your number as out of date, or start accumulating a long list of answers from random phone calls?
Excellent question. And the answer is the same as what you would do if different published sources have different numbers, or what you would do if a verifiable web site was updated with new numbers since the time it's information was added to WP.
Attributable personal contact to an identifiable authority does not introduce new problems that don't already present themselves in the approved methods of research. The notion that a personal contact results in irreconcilability or potential for inaccuracy is a disingenuous straw man. If these were issues isolated to personal contact, I could see the problem. But they simply and plainly are not; they occur in print and online sourcing as well.
Kdt
There are millions of good print resources in the world; I'd be happy if people actually finished the job of representing their content in WP, rather than fool around with marginal cases.
Stan
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l