[WikiEN-l] Widespread disagreement with Wikipedia:Verifiability

[Charles Matthews]

bobolozo wrote

> If this group of wikipedia editors, which are probably
> the most experienced editors around and which as you
> pointed out contains sitting arbitrators, if this
> group believes that totally unreliable sources should
> be left in place, which is  in fundamental opposition
> to the letter and spirit of Wikipedia:Verifiability,
> then we have a problem.

I doubt we have any disagreement on "totally unreliable sources". I doubt we have disagreement on "totally reliable sources" - there aren't any, in practical terms. So let's first be clear that this is all a grey area. 

And let's be clear on WP:V. It merely states that factual claims should (in principle) be verifiable from reliable sources. It means that a way to challenge WP content is to assert that no reliable source exists for what is claimed. It is certainly to be applied "per fact", not "per source".

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam