[WikiEN-l] Reliable sources: problems with [[WP:RS]]

[Bryan Derksen]

Jossi Fresco wrote:
> On Sep 18, 2006, at 6:28 AM, zero 0000 wrote:
> 
>> So, instead of
>> fixing a yes/no classification of sources, let's establish a
>> general principle that each article should be based on the
>> most reliable sources available FOR THAT TOPIC.
> 
> Not really. If there are no reputable sources for a topic, then that  
> topic may not be suitable for Wikipedia. For example, if the only  
> source for a subject is a bunch of USENET postings or a couple of  
> blogs, the subject may not pass the threshold of notability.

[[Spoo]] is a featured article whose references are mostly Comuserve,
GEnie and Usenet forum postings. Those postings turned out to be
reputable sources for information on Spoo, after intense scrutiny by
large numbers of editors. There are even articles that are about
entities that are solely or primarily confined to Usenet itself;
[[Kibology]] for example. It'd be hard to have any sort of article there
at all without basing it on Usenet postings in some way.

I suppose you can put them up for deletion, but I strongly doubt they'll
fail to pass.

-------------- 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/20061009/abe2b86e/attachment.pgp