2007/8/21, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net:
Applauding aggressive and confrontational ultimata for dealing with sourcing problems does not make for a better community or a better encyclopedia. Promoting a balanced and neutral approach would accomplish a lot more, and would be more in keeping with the principles that got this project where it is now.
Hear! Hear! I can remember once having had my edit reverted as 'unsourced', with the effect that my corrections were made wrong again. After being angry, I added the references, with the effect that the article had 10 citations to the same books in the places where I edited, and none at all where I didn't. Apparently that made for a good sourced article. Now they have been made to the end of the paragraphs, and nobody minded that either. Apparently having an unsourced article is okay, having sources without saying what they do source is okay, but editing an article without giving sources is not okay?