Wikipedians are only reliable sources for articles about themselves.
So whether or not a Wikipedian visited a covered bridge isn't useable in an article about that bridge.
This is because, we cannot verify a person's experiences. We can however verify a source fixed in media.
Will Johnson
**************Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home. (http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15&ncid=aolh...)
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
So whether or not a Wikipedian visited a covered bridge isn't useable in an article about that bridge.
This is because, we cannot verify a person's experiences. We can however verify a source fixed in media.
You are arguing that the rules should be followed. My point is that the rules produce an undesirable result in this case.
Ken Arromdee wrote:
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
So whether or not a Wikipedian visited a covered bridge isn't useable in an article about that bridge.
This is because, we cannot verify a person's experiences. We can however verify a source fixed in media.
You are arguing that the rules should be followed. My point is that the rules produce an undesirable result in this case.
When rules produce a result that is in conflict with fundamental reality checks we know that the application of the rules has gone too far.
Ec