[WikiEN-l] Arbitration Committee Seeking Comment

[Fred Bauder]

Aside from the question of whether you are doing original research  
(which, by the way, I heartily approve of and support a change in  
policy to accept) , a good effort to identify your source is still  
necessary. This is a grey area. If I go to the Saguache County  
Courthouse and look up documents on say the [[Baca Grant No. 4]] that  
would seem to be both a well documented source (book and page) and  
publicly available but also difficult and expensive to access and  
original research to boot. So pretty ambiguous in terms of our policies.

Fred

On Jun 6, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Sean Barrett wrote:

> Fred Bauder stated for the record:
>
>
>> There is also the question of whether it is  reasonably convenient  
>> to access it. For example, a NYT's article  might cost 2 bucks but  
>> something that requires accessing Nexus or  consulting an obscure  
>> journal is much more expensive.
>>
>
> So material from an "obscure" journal is less acceptable?  I guess  
> my digging into old Soviet naval records for information about  
> their nuclear submarines is a waste of time.
>
> The harder the original editor worked, the more likely his work  
> will be deleted.  That's ... I'm groping for the word ...  
> smart? ... no ... oh, I have it: perverse.
>
> -- 
>  Sean Barrett     | If you insist upon discussing my fiasco, I
>  sean at epoptic.com | shall forthwith go home. --Nadreck of Palain
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>