In a message dated 7/25/2008 10:23:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, cbeckhorn@fastmail.fm writes:
WP:V is very clear that peer-reviewed sources by professioanl publishers are our preferred sources in the areas where they exist. It is also clear that self-published material, even from experts, should be taken with a grain of salt. I'll include some quotes below. >>
------------- Your quotes are misread. Peer-reviewed articles where they exist are more reliable. They are not the standard however. For example in biography the number of "peer-review" articles is vanishingly small. In Physics it is overwhelming. Quite different animals.
You are wrong to lump "self-published material" with "even from experts". That isn't what the policy states, nor what we hashed out over and over years ago on this very point. We made a clear distinction between self-published material from non-experts, and self-published material from experts. You argument seems to blur that distinction that we carefully tried to draw.
Will Johnson
**************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)