[WikiEN-l] Another sourcing problem

[FT2]

IAR isn't for a regular, predictable, situation where a generic agreed
solution would be better, and not for a sourcing issue or "systematic
problem" like this. More and more often there is a chance (small in any
given case, large overall) that important information for an article may be
blog published, so we do have a genuine issue here.

I tend to use eventualism for filling out a page, not for correcting
violations of NPOV (paramount policy).I don't expect to find myself
thinking *"It's not balanced and gives undue weight but eventually we might
get a source that fixes it"*. That's different from extra information that
we don't need. As Charles says the problem is that RS is our filter to
ensure what we do say is reliable. So the question is, that information in
the blog - who says it's accurate? Why would a user rely upon it?

My suggested view is to look at the purpose of RS. The aim of RS is part of
a wider goal - not passing off dud information as good, and allowing users
to see transparently where our information comes from. We do that to an
extent with self published material. So I would be okay with a solution that
extended and built upon SELFPUB. For example:


Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of
information, without the requirement that they be published by experts in
the field or reliable sources, so long as:

   1. the content is salient or NPOV would be compromised if absent;
   2. the content is not published in a more reliable source;
   3. the author's details and the origins of the material (authenticity) is
   not in question;
   4. the author's position to speak to the matter or viewpoint involved is
   not in question;
   5. the material is not unduly self-serving;
   6. it does not involve claims about third parties;
   7. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the
   subject;
   8. the article is not based primarily on such sources;
   9. The material is clearly attributed to the author and the type of
   medium made clear (personal website, blog, etc) for the reader's
   understanding.

This is more, a natural extension and rationalization of an existing norm,
and puts SELFPUB on a platform with other material of a like nature. Worth
proposing?

FT2


On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com>wrote:


> >> Sure there's something you can do: fix the definition of reliable
> source.
>
> Or, isn't this the point of IAR?
>
>