[WikiEN-l] Philosophical question re sources

[Mikkerpikker]

> Theoretically yes, except that I would say any rebuttal rather than just
> a verifiable one.  It is NPOV because it represents the average of all
> views that have been submitted until then.  In practical terms that
> neutrality will cease as soon as one other person reads the article and
> challenges its contents, unless a visiting Beta Centaurian decides to
> get in on the act.  A challenge to the system can be as simple as a
> polite request for sources to be cited.

So Wikipedia policies only apply once someone insists it does? I.e. I
can keep an article about my random theory about Beta Centauri until
someone comes to read the article and wonders "mmm, I wonder if this
satisfies WP:V?"?

> Once a request has been made for verification, the original contributor
> has the primary burden of proof, but that does not prevent others from
> supplying proof if they so desire.  If the original statement is as
> patently ridiculous as the one you hypothesize, any attempt at rebuttal
> implies that there was something there worth rebutting, and the very act
> of initiating a rebuttal gives credibility to the original statement.

That's quite a statement. Holocaust denial, say, is often rebutted so
does this give those claims "credibility"?