[WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattack site link policy

[Gwern Branwen]

On  0, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> scribbled:
> On 03/07/07, Gwern Branwen <gwern0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That is precisely the issue with [[Essjay controversy]]: WR may not be a RS about anything else in the world - but is it a reliable source about what happens on WR? More generally, is any site with user-generated content a RS about what happens on that selfsame site? Obviously some people don't think the answer is yes.
>
> Well, not really. It was edited greatly after the attempt to get Phil
> Sandifer in trouble with the police so as to cover their trail.
>
> - d.

Fortunately, I foresaw exactly this objection and in my original edits provided links to the [[WebCite]] archive of the relevant page at the date I was citing it; unless you want to suggest their archival service is not reliable?

Also note that not long ago we were discussing on this very list how newspapers quietly modified their articles, which would seem to be analogous.

--
gwern
Crust e95 DDR&E 3M KEDO iButton R1 erco Toffler FAS RHL K3 Visa/BCC SNT Ceridian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070704/bdb3b21f/attachment.pgp