[Foundation-l] Verifiability: Constitution?

[valdelli at bluemail.ch]

It's simply crazy.

I know that the article [[:de:Wikimedia CH]] has been cancelled in 
the past because we are working to have this chapter and it is not 
established. 

Now Wikimedia CH is alive, it's working, we have a lot of 
references, documentation but... the article in german Wikipedia? 
It's lost.

I repeat... crazy, absolutely crazy.

Ilario

----Messaggio originale----
Da: eloquence at gmail.com
Data: 17.09.06 13.38
A: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"<foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
Oggetto: Re: [Foundation-l] Verifiability: Constitution?

On 9/17/06, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com> wrote:

> But how do you define 'can be sourced'? The only way that you can 
show
> that something can be sourced is by sourcing it. Does this mean 
that
> we should remove all unsourced statements from all articles? If 
so,
> there will be little Wikipedia left. If not, then what do we 
accept
> without source and what not?

There is currently a poll on the German Wikipedia whether new 
articles
that cite no sources should be deleted:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:
Meinungsbilder/Quellenpflicht_f%C3%BCr_neue_Artikel

The proposal, translated literally: "New articles may only be 
created
if they cite sources.These citations should be listed in the edit
summary [*] and/or in the article itself. To cite the main sources 
for
an article, the sections 'Literature' or 'Weblinks' should be 
used.
(...) New articles without sources can be deleted without further
discussion through a speedy deletion request."