Jimbo, it really isn't easy, for the reason I've explained to Bjorn in
my last two e-mails. Often, editors feel they don't know enough about
a subject to intervene, or they simply don't want to because they have
their own watchlist to look out for. Or maybe a citation has been
offered, but it's a terrible one, yet other editors don't see that
because they don't know the area.
That's why I thought it would be a good idea to form a team of people
who are experienced in telling the difference between a decent
reference and a lousy one; and who have a thorough understanding of
Wikipedia's cite sources, no original research, and NPOV
policies/guidelines.
Slim
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:22:30 -0800, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales
<jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
slimvirgin(a)gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it would be a good idea to form a team of
"no original research"
checkers who have the right to violate 3RR, and on whom any editor
could call for help in the case of a revert war triggered by an editor
adding unreferenced claims.
This strikes me as unnecessary. At any given time of the day or night
there are more than 130 people in #wikipedia. Just go there and ask
around for help, it's easy to find people to help.
--Jimbo