[WikiEN-l] Age fabrication and original research
wikimail at inbox.org
Tue Oct 6 16:58:14 UTC 2009
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Rob <gamaliel8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Ken Arromdee <arromdee at rahul.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Rob wrote:
> > In this context, the secondary source is "I found a reference to a
> > article which quotes the date". It's not going to discuss the conflict
> > way you describe--it's just more acceptable because it better fits the
> I got the newspaper article today and it turns out it discusses the
> birth date discrepancy in detail, with references to interviews with
> family, a number of documents, and court testimony. This is exactly
> the reason we should be using these kinds of sources as opposed to our
> own amateur database lookups, not the strawman of a rules fetish.
If they're available. But what if they're not? Is it okay to mention that
the contradictory information exists?
I doubt you're going to come up with a hard and fast rule which doesn't have
any unintended consequences. Ultimately, the fact that "everyone can edit"
ensures a system of "verifiability, not truth".
More information about the WikiEN-l