On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:05:44 +0100, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
"There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative "I heard it somewhere" pseudo information is to be tagged with a "needs a cite" tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons." - Jimmy Wales.
Not consitant with what Mr Wales has been up to [[Talk:Che Guevara]]. It's a fun read.
RfC is the second door on your left down the hall.
Sure, adequately sourcing it is preferable, but if it's a choice between waiting for a source or removing it, removing is a better option. Even if you put it back in with a source ten minutes later.
Depends. Removeing the vast majority of our articles is not a good idea.
Depends. Sometimes it's a great idea. But hard cases make bad law.
Guy (JzG)