[WikiEN-l] Otto Middleton (a morality tale)

[Carl (CBM)]

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Scott MacDonald
<doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> But my point is celebrity stories in newspapers, if they use unnamed or
> unattributable sources, are not reliable and should never amount to
> verification.

Unfortunately, the current language of WP:V not only declares that
professional newspapers are unilaterally reliable, they are even
decreed to be secondary sources, which removes some slight limitations
on how the material in newspaper stories could be used.  It seems that
some editors of WP:V actually believe this is the appropriate way to
handle newspaper stories; in any case it is unlikely to change.

> We might as well source things from random internet blogs and claim: "but
> this is verification (it may be true or not, but we don't care about
> truth)".

This is essentially what we already do. Moreover, many editors like
the fact that we cover stories quickly using primary sources (e.g. the
death of Michael Jackson) rather than waiting (for years?) for a
definitive account to be published in secondary sources.

> "Verification not truth" must not be a suicide pact and certainly not an
> excuse for sloppy publishing of gossip on BLPS.

The idea that someone cannot challenge a source fact simply because
they doubt its truth is very useful, though. It reduces many arguments
where editors "know" they are right, when they are really wrong.  If
we can't use sources to judge truth, and we can't use expert knowledge
without sources, what third option remains?

- Carl