Verifiability is a basic pillar of Wikipedia, so we should clearly cite less than well known statements. There's enough stuff out there that's often cited as fact when they're really as wrong as you can get. Only the most easily verifiable stuff can go unsourced.
I think it's only deletionist when you delete such claims that could be true instead of giving people the chance to verify it. Only when you can falsify it, it can be removed.
It's a fine line, but yes one should remain civil and friendly, but that's no reason to go easy on people that fail to adhere to policy. Sometimes a little harsh action can go a long way in teaching.
Mgm
On 8/14/06, stevertigo vertigosteve@yahoo.com wrote:
Im not exactly the most citatious Wikipedian, but nor do I have any tendency to make claims which arent easily verifiable. Over the years though Ive encountered a number of Wikipedians (I wont name names) who abuse or violate a clean interpretation of CIVIL by referring to CITE or V as a basis for what is essentially ownership of an article; in the form of a revert, rather than a constructive edit, correction, or (gasp!) a collaborative and helpful attempt to find a source.
Im not sure on the stats, but it is my impression that this demand for verifiability is 1) deletionistic 2) one sided, and not applied to one's own person and 3) comes with some attached notion of "reliable sources" by which material from any deemed "unreliable" sources can be deleted.
Thats the topic. Discuss.
Wikilove, -Stevertigo
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l