From: "Alphax (Wikipedia email)" alphasigmax@gmail.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_faux_pas
Highlighting specific examples is left as an exercise to the reader.
The only problem I see here is the longstanding problem that the "citation needed" tag is overly conspicuous and intrusive. I'd like to see this fixed somehow.
It's my belief that lists are especially prone to attract "drive-by" additions of shoot-from-the-hip, hearsay material. The temptation to say "Oooh! Oooh! I know one that they missed" is just so great.
Why, exactly, do you feel that there is no need to cite a published source for a statement such as that "[in Switzerland] when clinking glasses, it is an obligation to look into the eyes of the person holding the other glass?"
Generally because everything in every article should be based on a published source. That allows the article to be verified by third parties.
On 11/13/06, Daniel P. B. Smith wikipedia2006@dpbsmith.com wrote:
From: "Alphax (Wikipedia email)" alphasigmax@gmail.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_faux_pas
Highlighting specific examples is left as an exercise to the reader.
The only problem I see here is the longstanding problem that the "citation needed" tag is overly conspicuous and intrusive. I'd like to see this fixed somehow.
It's my belief that lists are especially prone to attract "drive-by" additions of shoot-from-the-hip, hearsay material. The temptation to say "Oooh! Oooh! I know one that they missed" is just so great.
Why, exactly, do you feel that there is no need to cite a published source for a statement such as that "[in Switzerland] when clinking glasses, it is an obligation to look into the eyes of the person holding the other glass?" _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l