[WikiEN-l] Age fabrication and original research

[Ray Saintonge]

Ken Arromdee wrote:
> 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.


Perhaps the rule should be rephrased to require the use of the most 
reliable fallacy? ;-)

Ec