[WikiEN-l] Age fabrication and original research

[Ken Arromdee]

On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Rob wrote:
> The fact that original secondary sources were wrong in this case is
> immaterial.  Errors in secondary sources should be a reason to dig up
> more secondary sources, not to make a point using primary ones.

Wikipedia is already full of places where people are required to jump through
hoops merely because that's what the rules require, even if it doesn't actually
help.  This is another one.

Searching far and wide to find a secondary source that quoted the primary
source gains you *nothing* except compliance with Wikipedia rules.  The
secondary source isn't going to do any better fact-checking than you did when
you just looked at the primary source directly--it just fills a rules
requirement.