On 18/08/06, Daniel P. B. Smith wikipedia2006@dpbsmith.com wrote:
Calls to CITE are too often just smokescreen for a weak or incivil or POV argument,
And objections to CITE are sometimes just smokescreens for disagreement with the verifiability policy itself.
It's worse than that. Currently the citation policy is that anything not cited can be removed at any time, without giving a reason. Given the low level of citing currently, this is a *massive* problem.
I often go back to an article, and half of it is just *gone*, and sometimes the information quoted names, dates etc. etc.. The information can be usually checked with 10 seconds flat using google. But there's *no* requirement to do even a half-assed check.
And they're completely within their rights to do that, in fact it's POLICY THAT YOU CAN DO IT AT ANY TIME.
The remaining article typically ends up biased of course. They just deleted stuff they didn't agree with, or 'sounded wrong'.
I'm considering going postal and go on a rampage through the wikipedia arbitrarily deleting stuff; you know, entire articles, paragraphs, sentences. It's not vandalism if it's a POLICY, right? ;-)