[WikiEN-l] "Articles that do not cite reliable published sources will be deleted."

[Eugene van der Pijll]

Cheney Shill schreef:
> > Because it says there is only a problem if the material
> > is doubtful. An
> > unsourced statement that is not challenged and not likely
> > to be
> > challenged -- and that is not libelous if untrue, I
> > should add -- is not
> > to be removed, according to WP:V.
> 
> That makes it highly subjective.

Subjective, yes. Don't know about highly subjective; as soon as there is
any significant difference of opinion if something should be sourced, it
is likely to be challenged.

>  What determines if it is
> doubtful or or likely to be challenged?

Common sense. Most people have this, or it would not be common.

> Submit whatever you like without sources.  It gets to stay if not
> challenged.  And if the challenge gets to stay if it's not
> challeneged.

No, as soon as there is a challenge, the statement (and the
counter-statement) should be sourced. That's what WP:V says: challenged
information should be sourced.

> So Wikipedia is a collection of unsourced
> opinions and unsourced counter challenges.  Long live the
> edit wars.

Ehm, no. The point is, that 90% of the information on wikipedia is
unsourced but not the subject of edit wars. It is this information that
I'm talking about.

Eugene