From: "The Cunctator"
<cunctator(a)gmail.com>
What makes Wikipedia great is that it doesn't make
the arbitrary and
elitist distinction between high and low culture, but democratically
includes information that its audience thinks is of interest.
Agreed.
But part of not making that distinction involves setting the same
standards for verifiability regardless of whether the information is
about high or low culture.
People should be *VERY HESITANT* about removing
information that
others have added.
By calling it "information" you're begging the question.
If it's not sourced there's no way to make a reliable judgement about
whether it IS "information."
My opinion is that it would be a good thing if people were a little
hesitant about _adding_ unsourced material.
Sourcing is critical but the "I'm going to
kill it if it isn't
sourced" is a philosophy that should be wielded with UTMOST care.
"Kill" is a rather strong term for "adding a {{fact}} tag, waiting a
week or so, then moving it to the Talk page."