[WikiEN-l] the verifiability of articles we already HAVE

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 4/26/06, Daniel P. B. Smith <wikipedia2006 at dpbsmith.com> wrote:
> A fire hydrant which appeared in the background of a picture of me
> published in the local weekly newspaper, which is a published, print
> source and arguably a reliable source.
>
> Before we put too much energy into hairsplitting as to whether this
> fire hydrant is verifiable and therefore encyclopedic, click the
> "random page" article and look at the article we already _have_.
>
I'd imagine as long as there are people putting their energy into
removing verifiable and encyclopedic content from Wikipedia there will
also be people putting their energy into keeping it in there.  Nothing
you say is going to change that.  The only thing that's going to stop
the waste of energy is for true consensus to be reached.

Anthony