On Sep 29, 2006, at 12:34 PM, David Russell wrote:
First of all, if 'all the major sources agree on' a particular fact, then where is the problem in citing one of them? Good Articles need to demonstrate compliance with the Manual of Style at the very least (if not all the other various guidelines on different issue)
Baloney. MoS is a hellhole of process - exactly what Good Articles were made to get around. Good Articles need to be pretty darn good - not perfectly adhere to an absurd bit of process that grew organically in a manner similar to kudzu.
- and if people
had followed [[WP:CITE]] in the first place then there wouldn't be the problem with the GA review, would there? It's not as if it is a brand new guideline that may be under dispute or unknown - WP:CITE has been around since 2002, if some editors decided to ignore it then it's no surprise that others objected to their work being elevated to GA status.
[[WP:CITE]] is unfollowable - both because it's impossible to edit practically while citing a source every line, and because it's another piece of crap MoS page.
-Phil