On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 WJhonson(a)aol.com wrote:
You must be fairly new then. When I read BLPs I see
tons of statements that
are not sourced. I don't remove them all and claim "not sourced!" I add
a
few {{fact}} tags here and there and move on.
You are focused on the fact that some anonymous editor complained about one
issue. But that complaint should be treated as coming from an anonymous
person.
Calling him an anonymous person, or treating him as one, privileges rule
literalism over common sense. He did not fit a particular Wikipedia rule
about use of self-published sources, but that rule is imperfect. We knew
who he was by any reasonable standards, he tried to correct his own article,
and we refused to correct it, even though unsourced material can be deleted
from a BLP at any time. This is very bad.
The normal course of action, is to fact-tag the
clause and move on.
The normal course of action is to delete the statement, at least if it's a
sincere complaint.