[WikiEN-l] Fred Bauder"clarifies"on attack site link policy

[Ken Arromdee]

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, John Lee wrote:
> > >If WR links were only deleted for not being reliable sources, we wouldn't
> > >be *having* this fuss.  Most of the questionable deletions of WR and
> > similar
> > >links are under circumstances where reliable sources are irrelevant--talk
> > >pages, Wikipedia signpost, etc.
> > Why post a link to a site which engages in harassment and outing, if
> > it's not even a reliable source?  In what way is that not dickish?
> Because different people have different interpretations of the phrase
> "reliable source". It is not dickery to disagree on what constitutes a
> reliable source; it is a content dispute. How the dispute is resolved, of
> course, may result in dickery from one or both sides.

In this case, a better answer is "because reliable sources don't always
matter".  Non-reliable sources get linked in talk pages all the time.  We
don't delete them.