Ray Saintonge wrote:
Matthew Brown wrote:
On 6/16/07, Jossi Fresco jossifresco@mac.com wrote:
A Wikiproject to "eliminate unreferenced articles"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Unreferenced_articles
This seems a bit excessive.
Well, it depends how that elimination is being done - by adding references is quite OK, for instance. By nominating for deletion things that no references can be found for after an exhausting search is also OK in my book.
Experience shows that the "exhausting search" is not always there. Sometimes there is no search before nomination; perhaps a nomination should show evidence that some searchging has happened.
Ec
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Actually, an article saying "the sky is blue" is inaccurate, or at least incomplete. The sky can be blue, or grey, black with tiny spots of light, completely black, orange, purple, white...Of course, if you've put in a good source, I can go look at your source and find all that. If you haven't, I don't even have a way to verify what you said. (Nor would any remotely useful article consist solely of "the sky is blue".)
In practice, unsourced articles are likely to be challenged (by being nominated for deletion), and that practice is becoming more common. It's a bit unusual to see someone say on the one hand "People challenge (nominate for deletion) unsourced articles way too often!" and on the other "Well, see, those don't require sources, they're not likely to be challenged."