On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, FT2 wrote:
Verifiability not truth is probably one of the most
poorly understood
expressions on the wiki.
It roughly means that we document what can be factually checked, in
preference to what we "believe".
Unfortunately, "roughly" isn't "precisely".
This argument started with a verifiable-but-false claim which was factually
checked, but where we're not allowed to use the result of the fact-checking
(since it was a primary source and secondary sources take preference).
The covered bridge example was also one ("I fact-checked the source by looking
at the bridge. The source was wrong." is not acceptable.)