[WikiEN-l] Abuse of your services

[Rick]

--- slimvirgin at gmail.com wrote:
> On 5/6/05, Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org> wrote:
> > Just for the record, where is the policy stating
> that Usenet /cannot/ be
> > used?  I'm not being sarcastic; I genuinely don't
> know.
> 
> The relevant policies state that Wikipedia sources
> must be published
> sources, and that the publishers must be, in some
> sense, reputable,
> authoritative, and credible. These terms are
> impossible to define, but
> they boil down to relying on publishing houses that
> have some form of
> fact-checking procedure, or peer-review if it's an
> academic subject.
> Sometimes the degree of fact-checking will be
> minimal, but there
> should be some infrastructure within which
> information is checked,
> complaints are responded to, and obviously authors
> are usually not
> anonymous.
> 
> None of these things applies to Usenet. It is pretty
> much the
> definition of a source that should not be used
> (except in very limited
> circumstances as primary-source material). See
> [[Wikipedia:No original
> research]] for more details.
> 
> Sarah

Then all of the information about Sollog has to go,
all of the information about any Usenet celebrity
(Kibo?), all information about any Usenet news group,
unless there is '''''published''''' verification? 
Does this mean we can't use links to newspaper
websites?  Those aren't published, after all.

RickK
 


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Make Yahoo! your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs