Charlotte Webb wrote:
going to challenge an article that cites a lot of
sources, not even if it's a stub.
Make it idiot-proof and somebody will build a better idiot.
intelligent idiot will soon discover how to invent reliable sounding
sources, even if for no other reason than to keep the deletionists at bay.
As long as it's relevant to the subject, if I cite the "Journal of
tropical veterinary science" (a real magazine published in Calcutta
between 1907 and 1912) who is going to be in a position to challenge
that? Sometimes I feel safer reading something that has no references
at all than one that has false references to an obscure but real