On 12/11/05, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/11/05, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
In my opinion it is never acceptable to keep false information in the article namespace. There are places where eventualism is acceptable, but presenting false information as true information is not one of them.
Oh well, whatever. Two separate people seem honestly and irreparably opposed to the idea. I'll just drop it.
I agree with you, but with one caveat. It shouldn't be removed, just marked as being unverified. If it is marked as such, Wikipedia specifically abdicates all responsibility for the contents. This way, the information is still available so *anyone* can verify it, admin or not.
-- Sam
For some reason I see a huge difference between leaving false information in and putting a disclaimer at the top and moving the information to the talk page. Doing the latter still leaves the information available so anyone can verify it.
Unfortunately, talk pages of deleted articles are candidates for speedy deletion. But then again, it really doesn't matter, because history only undeletion can be performed by any admin without a vote. So if any user wants to verify it, admin or not, just look up the title in google, write a couple sentences, and request history only undeletion. Or, alternatively, ask an admin to give you the text of the article. Either way it's not *that* big of a deal, though I do feel things would be better if you didn't have to go through that step.
I'm gonna say one more thing (for this message), and that's that the current policy already kind of supports this. Anything that isn't verified can be moved to the talk page, a page which contains no content is a CSD, and a talk page of a deleted page is itself a CSD.
Anthony