[WikiEN-l] Verifiability and Africa

[Gareth Hughes ([[User:Garzo]])]

On 03/03/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You're confusing "verified" and "verifiable". All Wikipedia requires
> is that information actually has been published or is otherwise
> verifiable. We don't do fact checking, per se.

Well, we do do the fact checking, as far as we can: it would seem
negligent not to. However, it might be useful to have "verifiable is
quite different from verified" displayed somewhere appropriate. It
seems that sometimes the policy can be taken as implying that the
'weight of evidence' lies with the defence — guilty until proven
innocent. However, the requirement is not to make claims that are
unverifiable, and to be clear how any claims can be verified. The
population of a Malawian town, for instance, may not be verifiable on
the web, but it is verifiable. We also have to consider that easily
accessible sources may be misleading — a website's claims about that
Malawian town may be based on the memoirs of a nineteenth century
European visitor, whereas a local Chichewa newspaper (unintelligible
to most Wikipedians) may have accurate information. In a lot of
articles, the English website may not be the best source, simply the
most accessible. I would hate to see information removed because it
isn't verified yet is verifiable, or because its verifiability is
inaccessible to monoglot English-speakers tied to their computer
screens.