[WikiEN-l] Another tricky "acceptable source" question

[MacGyverMagic/Mgm]

Not all books can be found for free in a library. They're still verifiable.
I think authority on the subject would thrump cost in this case
anyway, if cost even played a role.

Mgm

On 4/18/06, Guettarda <guettarda at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/18/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >   I have access to a report published by Gartner (a giant in the
> > database research world). As I understand, it's publicly available -
> > for a significant cost. I also believe that I am allowed to privately
> > distribute it under certain circumstances, probably including
> > verifying that I'm not making up stuff supposedly in it.
> >
> > It's an incredibly detailed analysis of 20 or ETL tools, and would be
> > very useful for articles such as [[Extract, transform, load]] and
> > articles on individual ETL tools. But, is it verifiable?
> >
> > Steve
>
>
> If it's published, it should count.  "Easily available" isn't a criterion.
> Is it likely to be in university libraries?  Is it something that
> professionals in the field are likely to have?  Then it easily meets WP:V,
> IMO
>
> Ian
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>