David Gerard wrote
In general, questioning a reference shouldn't provoke this level of defensiveness. It did turn out to differ in small but important ways from the original citation.
Is it me, or is this thread and its predecessor(s) illustrating something quite different from what we were being told? The proposition 'cite original sources and all will be well' seems hardly to be sustained by all this.
Like it says under the edit box, citing sources is supposed to help others to verify postings. Unless it is done with exactly that in mind (easy access, amongst other things), doesn't it mostly displace debate?
Charles