On 12/3/05, daniwo59(a)aol.com <daniwo59(a)aol.com> wrote:
I want to outline my position here, so that there is
no misunderstanding, as
there seems to be.
1. I am NOT saying that every fact in Wikipedia must be sourced or removed.
2. I am saying that every fact in Wikipedia should be SOURCEABLE.
3. I am not saying that everyone must give their sources whenever they edit.
4. I am saying that we can encourage people to work on a project to find
sources for each fact, just like we have encouraged people to fix commas or
5. I am not saying that people who cannot source should be discouraged from
6. I am saying that we should encourage people to find sources, for their
own work and for other's work as well.
7. I am saying that there are many different types of sources, and we should
find ways of including them. (BTW, in a previous job I worked extensively
with oral histories, which are a wonderful source of information, even if they
must always be verified).
7. Finally, I am saying that high quality is NOT something we can compromise.
This seems like a reasonable approach... Actually, strike that, it
seems like what we already should be doing, in theory -- isn't it
already true that every fact must be sourceable? We (myself included)
just aren't so good at enforcing it by catching questionable
statements and trying to source them.
"There was a point to this story, but it has temporarily
escaped the chronicler's mind." --Douglas Adams