[WikiEN-l] The Economist on "notability"

[David Gerard]

On 13/03/2008, Todd Allen <toddmallen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Great. Then (s)he can find such a summary on a fansite.
>  Or, if we have reliable sources, and only if, on Wikipedia.


For this purpose, that *is* a reliable source. Such sites being
written by subject area experts.

"Reliable sources" is even squishier and more subjective than
"notability." e.g. No-one who's ever actually dealt with journalists
would assume that because something's in the NYT it's *necessarily*
accurate to a useful degree for any given purpose.

"No reliable sources" is increasingly (as in the example of your
email) used as an argument from a combination of personal distaste and
subject-area ignorance. This is not helpful in writing useful
encyclopedia articles.


- d.