On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 08:09 -0500, Omegatron wrote:
On 1/25/07, Matt R <matt_crypto(a)yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
The same holds for RS and CITE: they don't magically guarantee quality by
themselves, but they are great tools for doing so if not abused.
But they are only used for abuse. A simple sentence or two in WP:V and a
dose of consensus is sufficient.
Only used for abuse?? How do you find that? I know that demanding decent
reliable sources for an /encyclopaedia/ is _controversial_ (sadly), but
its one of the things that (supposedly) makes us different from other
non-encyclopaedic volunteer run collections of information.
Fran
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l