On Nov 23, 2007 11:06 AM, jossi fresco <jossif(a)gmail.com> wrote:
No one is arguing for the dismissal of the concept of "reliable
sources", which is already explained in detail at [[WP:V#Sources]].
What is being proposed is to redirect WP:RS to WP:VSources.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:V#Sources
-- Jossi
The concept of "reliable sources" is of utmost importance. It's
important
that we have a "reliable sources guideline" page to refer people to. To not
have a page on that is not acceptable. Right now, information about
sourcing is on WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:BLP, and other pages. We also have
[[Wikipedia:Reliable source examples]]. The reliable sources page is a
logical place to summarize these and provide guidance on evaluating sources.
Especially for newbies, this makes sense. If someone makes an edit, adding
something dubious that sources something not meeting WP:RS, I will revert
and say "xx source is not a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]" or "rv per
[[WP:RS|reliable sources guidelines]]" or something to that effect. They
probably don't even have to look at the guideline page, as everyone knows
what "reliable" means. But, if they want, they can read over the reliable
sources guideline page and from there go to the relevant policy pages or the
example pages. They usually get it when I mention "reliable sources". This
approach to watching pages has worked well for me.
Also, having "Wikipedia:Reliable Sources" as the title of the page makes it
easy to remember. If the newbie comes back, they are more likely to
remember "Wikipedia:Reliable sources" than
"Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources".
It would be a shame to take this page away. It would not at all be helpful
for me. To the contrary.
-Aude