Well, here goes the expert rebellion again. Consistently I've found editors rejecting any personal expertise in favor of anything that looks much like a traditional source.
As far as the bridge thing is concerned, my personal bias is against including that sort of information, one way of the other. Reality is too much of a moving target for that sort of detail to maintain currency.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Carl Beckhorn cbeckhorn@fastmail.fm wrote:
But the verifiability policy is not a suicide pact. It doesn't mean that editors should ignore what they actually do know about a subject. WP:V was never intended to prevent people from using their personal knowledge and training in the editorial process and on talk pages. WP:NOR was meant to keep novel, crackpot theories out of articles, not to force people to cite standard facts that every undergraduate textbook on the subject conveys.