Tony Sidaway (minorityreport(a)bluebottle.com) [050121 21:31]:
Quality of source is usually (but not always) POV.
We're supposed to be
writing NPOV articles.
A caveat such as "warning: the article relies on population projections
that were proven by events to be grossly in error" is fine and NPOV. A
caveat such as "the claims at this site are patently incorrect" is POV and
superfluous. Otherwise rely on the general site content disclaimer and
the reader's commonsense.
Yes. I feel sufficient trepidation at separating external links into pro
and con.
- d.