My suggestion is to accept content issues, but appoint committees to research questions which are beyond ordinary competence. If someone is "on the level" they can cite book and page in established references in the field. Inability to do so generally means they are an original researcher or out of touch with the literature. There are some grey areas, for example, most references are in an unusual language, Armenian, for example, but almost all legitimate references can be accessed though an ordinary library with Inter Library Loan, or at a good college library. But you see, by looking at it this way it comes back to a behavior problem, not citing sources or improperly removing information that has been sourced because they don't like the point of view.
Fred
On Jun 5, 2005, at 6:56 AM, David Gerard wrote:
steven l. rubenstein (rubenste@ohiou.edu) [050605 22:48]:
What we need first is a ruling by or concerning the ArbCom that it will consider and pass judgements on content-based disputes, or it will not. We just need to make this clear, one way or the other.
I can tell you now we have no intention of taking on this one as well! Not just the amount of work, but simply that that's not what the AC was put into place for.
And if ArbCom will not or cannot handle content-based disputes, we need to develop another committee or mechanism.
Well, yeah.
There are all sorts of possible problems. Specialist Point Of View is not necessarily Neutral Point Of View. That sort of thing.
I am repeating something I have said several times in the past. This issue is not new.
That's why it's being discussed here as well :-)
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l