[Foundation-l] Porchesia atonement
dgerard at gmail.com
Tue Oct 3 13:47:44 UTC 2006
On 03/10/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The problem is how to come up with a sources
> > criterion that can't be hoaxed.
> > There's enough trouble with stupid AFD nominations
> > on en:wp by people
> > who couldn't find the subject on Google and presumed
> > it therefore
> > didn't exist.
> > Will we forbid print sources unless a scan is lodged
> > with the WMF?
> Obviously not (Copyright?). I think you are beind
> sarcastic, but it is hard to be ceratain.
It is somewhat reductio ad absurdum. But there are those on en: who
seriously advocate that a reference can only be good if it's easy for
a normal person (presumably in the US) to find.
> "How to
> come up with a sources criterion that can't be hoaxed"
> is only a the problem with the proposed solution of
> requiring sources. I think this is large enough
> problem that requiring sources should be thrown out of
> consideration for this particular problem.
Coming up with a rigid rule that would catch this hoax without causing
ridiculous quantities of collateral damage will not be easy.
[[:en:Wikipedia:Reliable sources]] is marked "guideline" but phrased
didactically, so when applied robotically - and people do apply it
robotically - is disastrous in practice, gutting articles and causing
the sort of PR disasters over living bios it was written didactically
so as to avert.
More information about the foundation-l