[WikiEN-l] Proposed {{prod}} for articles with no sources

[Ray Saintonge]

Bryan Derksen wrote:

>IMO this is a bad idea. It's going to result in bad references being
>inserted simply to stave off deletion, it's going to result in good
>articles being deleted because nobody happened to be paying attention at
>the particular moment they were marked for deletion or because a library
>is required for sourcing, and it's going to result in people (such as
>myself) avoiding using {{fact}} or {{unreferenced}} tags because it'd
>draw unwanted consequences. When I put {{fact}} on something it's
>because I'd like to see a reference added, not because I want the
>article deleted.
>
>Why is there this need for a hard and fast deadline? Wikipedia's been
>doing fine without one, it's got plenty of heavily-referenced articles
>already.
>
The problem is not just hard and fast deadlines; it's also about an 
inability to distinguish between deleting a few words and a whole article.

I stuck a {{fact)) tag in the Madonna article because of an internal 
inconsistency; the article said she was the third of six children then 
proceeded to list seven of which the third had a male name.  I fully 
expected that someone more familiar with the subject would come along 
and fix that, and it happened.  I don't expect any drastic action with 
that kind of thing.  To me a collaborative project is about people being 
helpful with these little problems, not about finding excuses for 
savaging the work of others.

Ec