There are three problems to relying on AfD alone 1. the load on AfD is everything has to come there because there are no clear guidelines for people trying to write articles in good faith 2. the impossibility of holding a rational discussion on AfD without some rules to refer to in the argument--it all becomes a matter of whether ILIKEIT. 3. lack of consistence (and we deal with this by actually saying we dont need to be consistent, the tell-tell sign of a immature system that has defined neither its practices or its principles.)
On 11/22/07, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"David Goodman" wrote
To say all food served should be edible is begging the question. Food by definition is things suitable to be eaten. To say something needs to be verifiable without saying what it means is not much help in practice. Just like "notable" or "encyclopedic"
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:47:33 -0800, "jossi fresco" jossif@gmail.com wrote:
I spy a dangerous fallacy. It may be that you can't _define_ Verifiability without defining "reliable source". But we can certainly _agree_ to Veriability without defining "reliable source". And in fact we have.
(One can agree that food served in a restaurant should be edible, without defining "edible".)
My point entirely, though. We have a "question begging" culture. "Notability" begs the question "noted by whom?". We cope.
The other extreme is a wikilawyering culture. The correct answer to the "you haven't defined your terms" is: cui bono? Does making things more black-and-white in an area help the project, or (as here) help pettifogging editors who are going to raise source criticism to such an art that only access to a huge academic library will allow people to contribute? "Duck tests" for verifiability make a lot of sense, actually.
What we do is to make operational decisions, such as allowing AfD to cut through notability imponderables. This is for the best.
Charles
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l