On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 08:09 -0500, Omegatron wrote:
On 1/25/07, Matt R matt_crypto@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@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l