Wednesday, January 3, 2007, 7:05:16 PM, Ken wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Bogdan Giusca wrote:
The problem is that around 95% of those articles are not sourced (or they are sourced from forum and blog posts) and at least 70% won't be able to be sourced because they were never mentioned in the mainstream press -- and probably very few were mentioned in books and journals.
Perhaps that means you need a broader view of what sourcing is.
Maybe I spent too much time editing history articles, where the source credibility matters, but accepting blog/forum/usenet posts as valid sources would be a great mistake, IMO.