[WikiEN-l] Handling unreferenced but likely-valid material

[Ryan Wetherell]

Like how Wikipedia was supposed to be a development grounds for
Nupedia?  My point is that a "Crappopedia" could open a very large can
of worms.

--Ryan

On 11/29/06, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:
> I was thinking of an idea that articles could be trimmed down to what's been
> sourced and the longer (albeit unsourced) article could go to some sort of
> Crappopedia where it awaits confirmation. Stuff that is confirmed with a
> source could be added back. That way, Wikipedia could maintain integrity and
> the other wiki could be a development grounds.
>
> On 11/29/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/30/06, Daniel P. B. Smith <wikipedia2006 at dpbsmith.com> wrote:
> > > e) Once tagged, there should be no big rush about deleting the
> > > material, but it should not remain indefinitely, either. How long?
> > > Assuming that there's no specific reason to doubt the material,
> > > months and months.
> > >
> > > The _only_ objections to this I can think of is that that the tags
> > > are ugly--which is true but susceptible to a technical fix--or that
> > > we are not serious about verifiability and don't truly want to
> > > restrict Wikipedia content to things that are supported by published
> > > material.
> >
> > I don't think deleting accurate, high-quality, unreferenced material
> > is in Wikipedia's best interests. Asking for a source, yes. Adding
> > sources, yes. But *deleting* good material? No.
> >
> > Steve
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>