On 10/29/07, Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
John Lee wrote:
> Is it your position that having no sources should constitute a criterion for
> speedy deletion?
Maybe not speedy. But they certainly shouldn't be
allowed to stick
around indefinitely either. My idea was a PROD-like system specifically
for sourceless articles, under which one can remove the prod by adding a
minimum of one relevant source. We pay lip service to sourcing, but we
don't -enforce- it. It's a bit like saying "Really, vandalizing is bad,
we mean it, don't do that", but then never actually blocking anyone for
vandalism. In the same vein, we should either do away with the source
requirement, or enforce it by -actually- removing unsourced content. Bet
you can guess which I would like to see.
(As an aside, if we implemented a system like that, I'd be all for anon
page creation, especially since we seem to have plenty of newpage
patrollers right now.)
Have you ever {{prod}}ded a newly created article with no sources and
had that {{prod}} tag removed but no sources ever added? I would
think if at least one source couldn't be found showing that something
existed a {{prod}} deletion would be a slam dunk. But maybe this is
just wishful thinking.