There are quite a number of people who like tinkering with birth years
for the hell of it. it's one of the most common forms of vandalism. A
good deal of the present BLP problem is the difficulty of preventing
this on the more obscure articles. It would be counterproductive to
have a policy to accept unsourced corrections of things like that,
uncontroversial though they may seem.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>>
>> If someone says that a relatively uncontroversial fact in an article about
>> themselves is wrong, we should fix it. If our process says we shouldn't
>> listen to them, then we need to fix both the process and the article.
>>
>> If you really doubt that the person themselves is sending you a correction,
>> then fine. But that's only good if you really have some reason to doubt
it's
>> them. Saying "what if it isn't them" and then stretching it to
cover all
>> situations whether you believe it's them or not is just elevating process
>> above people.