[WikiEN-l] Getting hammered in a tv interview is not fun

[Fred Bauder]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Slim Virgin [mailto:slimvirgin at gmail.com]
>Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 06:47 PM
>To: fredbaud at waterwiki.info, 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Getting hammered in a tv interview is not fun
>
>On 3/29/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
>> If the information does not have a specific source attached to it such as a page in a book or the equivalent, it is unsourced. You are not obligated to read whole books when no page is given. The priority needs to go to 4) Remove all unsourced harmful or extremely dubious sounding material
>> >from biographies, and unsourced harmful material from other articles and probably extends to removing such material when that is all that is in the article, even if it is sourced.
>>
>The problem with living bios goes beyond unsourced material.
>Everything in a bio could be sourced and it might still be an unfair
>portrait of the person. Then there's the problem of Wikpedia editors
>hunting down every tiny bit of published material from decades ago,
>thereby reviving stories that were long dead, or posting something
>that was published only in a local newspaper, thereby turning it into
>an international story.
>
>But if you try to remove material like that from a bio, or delete a
>bio entirely because it's inherently unfair, a great hue and cry goes
>up about censorship, and a revert war begins.
>
>Sarah

Yep, that's what happens, but folks need to know that one side is right, the other side wrong. There is no limit to removal of unsourced crap. Repeatedly putting crap back in will, eventually, result in sanctions.

Fred