[WikiEN-l] fancruft

[Bryan Derksen]

Matt Brown wrote:
> On 7/20/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 21/07/06, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>>> No, it isn't.  I'm sorry you can't see that.
>> Perhaps you could humour me and explain how they are different?
> 
> I suspect Anthony might be of the opinion that an encyclopedia should
> only be a tertiary source, summarising the judgment of secondary
> sources.

If so, it seems like pointless pedantry to me. What if we were to
summarize a transcript of the episode instead? The extra step of
indirection has no effect on the end result.

And primary sources are explicitly allowed by WP:NOR anyway, so the
whole issue seems moot. See
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary_and_secondary_sources>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060721/ba625f6b/attachment.pgp