[WikiEN-l] Using Wikipedia unlikely to result in collapse of knowledge

[Ray Saintonge]

Ken Arromdee wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote:
>   
>> We already do have in a way quality warnings, all the editorial
>> warnings at the top of articles in a way say this article is still in
>> progress. (those that say more sources needed, copyedit needed, etc).
>>
>> We also rank articles by "quality" when wikiprojects do their article
>> classes. In theory an "A" class article is better then a "B" class
>> article, etc.
>>     
>
> By the same reasoning used for spoilers, we don't have a source which
> states that an article needs copyediting or that it is class B.  (Remember
> that Wikipedia itself isn't a reliable source.)  Making that decision
> ourselves is original research.
>
>   
Being a reliable source depends on one's perspective.  If we have a rule 
saying that we cannot use other Wikipedia articles as a reliable source, 
that's only a rule rather than an objective determination about the 
reliability of any given article.  A spoiler warning presupposes that 
someone's experience will be spoiled, it relates a future event that 
cannot take place until someone has read the article.  Reliable spoiler 
warnings require reliable crystal balls.

Ec