2008/10/22 Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com:
Indeed. Requiring some kind of evidence of claims that contradict a claim which already has evidence to support it seems like common sense to me. Of course, in cases where it's completely implausible for the subject to be lying (how to spell their child's name, say), it might be worth taking a primary source over a secondary source. That primary source needs to be reliable, though - there needs to be a way to make sure they are the person they claim to be. Posting it on their blog, for instance, would be good, posting it on the Wikipedia talk page usually wouldn't.
It does require some common sense. I recall Kim Bruning noting with amusement that a comment from Patrick Nielsen-Hayden on an AFD discussion on a science fiction author probably counted as a reliable source in that field ;-)
- d.