Good point. I am a teacher so tend to rely on refereed journals as reliable sources...tho science writer *J**onah Lehrer* even calls these into question. =============
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas@googlemail.com
wrote:
Depends on the explanation I suppose. But "reliable source" is jargon too, in many cases.
We do have difficulty communicating with non wikipedians. Not in a bad faith way; it is hard to communicate with others.
I just think we are too quick to blame the subject for "not understanding us". When it cuts deeply both ways.
Tom Morton
On 8 Sep 2012, at 16:29, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Wow high and mighty much?
I haven't had chance to look into this; but I bet I know what I will find. Someone being a bit of a jerk to him, which has led to having to take this approach.
You might be justified in saying this if he was really told he wasn't "credible". If he was told that he wasn't a "reliable source" in WP's terms, that is a different kettle of fish.
Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l