[WikiEN-l] Unreliable sources, or no sources at all?

[Todd Allen]

On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 12:32 PM, bobolozo <bobolozo at yahoo.com> wrote:
>  >  My question is, is it a good idea to simply go through
>  >  and remove large numbers of these?  Are we better off
>  >  with no sources at all for portions of text, rather
>  >  than have references which consist of message board
>  >  postings and personal websites and such?
>
>  Absolutely not, under any circumstances.  Never remove a reference
>  unless you either (a) remove the information referenced (placing it on
>  the talk page unless it is libellous), or (b) add another reference to
>  a better source that completely covers everything the previous
>  reference did.
>
>  David is correct that removing references like this will lead to swift sanction.
>
>  -Matt
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  WikiEN-l mailing list
>  WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

Though, I would say it would be best to tag it {{fact}} or {{real
citation needed}} or whatever it is, and remove it if none can be
found, if it is in the least bit questionable or dubious.
Self-published sources are not reliable. I do agree, though, that the
questionable information should be removed along with the reference.
Better to have it clearly marked "We got this from a crappy source"
then to just have it there with no provenance at all. If the
information is poorly sourced, it should be taken out until and unless
a real one can be found, not just the source removed.

-- 
Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows.