Quoting Axel Boldt axelboldt@yahoo.com:
--- Vicki Rosenzweig vr@redbird.org wrote:
In general, I think this is a good use for Talk pages.
I disagree: sources are a vital part of the article and should not be hidden away in an area that most readers will never find. I think of Talk as short term discussions aimed at improving an article, not as a depository of meta information. If all Talk pages are deleted tomorrow, the encyclopedia should still be self-contained and complete.
Sources are extremely useful information; it's impossible to evaluate material without sources. Why would we possibly hide that information from readers?
Axel
I tend to agree -
It seems that the bottom line is who are your users (or who would you like them to be) and the goals of wikipedia. If I know that Axel does impeccable research and in an expert in the field of biometrics, then I may be satisfied - but the casual user or the user that comes in via Google doesn't know Axel & may not be able to evaluate/use the information.
If you want wikipedia to be primarily a source for information on popular culture - (and there is nothing wrong with that) - then you probably don't need a lot of sources - that information is readily available from a variety of sources. If you want any kind of scholarly (perhaps credible is a better word) reputation then you have to give sources -
It's hard for me to get excited about the particular format - so long as I can find the source.
Plus - there are contributors who take it as a personal insult to be asked for sources - perhaps if it were a general requirement, some of the ruffled feathers syndrome might be avoided.
bob