Exactly right. Using the documents themselves prior to secondary analysis
is a WP:PSTS problem in the first place. Once secondary sources have
analyzed them, the sourcing problem will be resolved, and any secrecy
concern will be even more moot than it is already.
Frank
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net>wrote;wrote:
We might suppress a leak made directly into Wikipedia,
for example
information about a troop movement, but once something has been published
on a thousand mirrors there is little point. I don't think links on
Wikipedia to documents which remain classified is a good idea. The
disclosed primary documents will come under intense analysis in reliable
sources; those analyses are notable and properly included in Wikipedia
despite their source in classified primary documents. Copying a list of
potential military targets from a classified document would seem out of
bounds unless a source generally considered reliable has widely
distributed the list.
Fred
User:Fred Bauder
This might need some eyes and attention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators'_notā¦
It concerns Wikipedia articles reproducing the content of the recent
Wikileaks releases, notably
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Critical_Foreign_Dependencieā¦
Andreas
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l