That was the original idea, I agree, but we've moved on from that. We
long ago accepted that simply adding what you know doesn't work since
there is no way for people to trust it. We now do require people
source things, we just aren't very good at enforcing it (I believe it
was Jimbo that said people shouldn't be tagging dubious statements
with {{fact}}, they should just be removing them completely).
Exactly. The days of unsourced facts, much less articles, being okay to
leave unchallenged is long over.
On Feb 1, 2008 4:20 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Good for you.
When we update the site code to read "Edit this page if
you have source material avaliable" instead of "edit this page" that
will be a reasonable expectation to apply to others. The entire
project, let's note, was built on people wandering by an adding a fact
they happened to know, with the idea that mass untrained peer review
would be good enough to get a working project. Citing sources is one
of the ways we get to that point, but we have to remember: the project
is designed to be editable by anyone in a casual and volunteer manner.
We hurt ourselves if we expect everybody to have multiple sources on
hand before they edit or create an article.
That was the original idea, I agree, but we've moved on from that. We
long ago accepted that simply adding what you know doesn't work since
there is no way for people to trust it. We now do require people
source things, we just aren't very good at enforcing it (I believe it
was Jimbo that said people shouldn't be tagging dubious statements
with {{fact}}, they should just be removing them completely).
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l