On Oct 10, 2006, at 7:43 PM, Sarah wrote:
I think if you could explain your views on this it would help to illuminate what the differences are between your position and that of the editors who support WP:V.
I don't think there's a difference between my position and the position of editors supporting WP:V, except insofar as I don't think WP:V should rely on such an obviously broken page as WP:RS (Something you apparently agree about). Once the problems with our definitions of sources are settled, I may be able to more usefully articulate this. But as long as there's such serious doubt over our definition of WP:RS, we have to recognize that WP:V is, while necessary, also not currently in a functional form.
-Phil