[WikiEN-l] Age fabrication and original research

[Ray Saintonge]

Ken Arromdee wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, FT2 wrote:
>   
>> So the resolution of your question above is, if anyone could in principle
>> check it without analysis, just by witnessing the object or document and
>> attesting it says what it says (or is what it is, or has certain obvious
>> qualities), then that's verifiable. If it would need analysis,
>> interpretation or deduction to form the view, so that some views might be
>> credible/expert and some might not, then we don't try to "play the expert"
>> here, we look at what credible sources/experts say instead.
>>     
>
> 1) That doesn't seem to be actual Wikipedia policy.
>
>   
One of the functions of IAR is to protect us from becoming slaves to 
policy that leads us to information which defies common sense or which 
leads us into absurdities.

Ec