On Oct 10, 2006, at 1:58 AM, Bryan Derksen wrote:
If [[Spoo]] can maintain featured article status while being based largely on things that WP:RS explicitly says "should not be used as primary or secondary sources", something is clearly broken somewhere. I consider the Spoo article to be of very good quality so I'm inclined to believe it's WP:RS that's the problem.
What may work for [[Spoo]] may not work for [[New_anti-Semitism]].
The main issue here is if we are dealing with a controversial topic, a biography of a living person, or an ongoing enterprise. In these cases, the need for reliable sources is paramount. In the case of Spoo, if we do not have the article 100% verifiable to reliable sources, nobody will be harmed, really.
-- Jossi