On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 12:32 PM, bobolozo bobolozo@yahoo.com wrote:
My question is, is it a good idea to simply go through and remove large numbers of these? Are we better off with no sources at all for portions of text, rather than have references which consist of message board postings and personal websites and such?
Absolutely not, under any circumstances. Never remove a reference unless you either (a) remove the information referenced (placing it on the talk page unless it is libellous), or (b) add another reference to a better source that completely covers everything the previous reference did.
David is correct that removing references like this will lead to swift sanction.
-Matt
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Though, I would say it would be best to tag it {{fact}} or {{real citation needed}} or whatever it is, and remove it if none can be found, if it is in the least bit questionable or dubious. Self-published sources are not reliable. I do agree, though, that the questionable information should be removed along with the reference. Better to have it clearly marked "We got this from a crappy source" then to just have it there with no provenance at all. If the information is poorly sourced, it should be taken out until and unless a real one can be found, not just the source removed.