On Dec 14, 2007 4:38 PM, David Gerard
<dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 14/12/2007, Relata Refero
<refero.relata(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One problem: an article there'll probably
have to be viewed as a
self-published source; I don't see Google claiming to
exercise any
editorial control. WP:V might see a few disagreements as people try
to alter it to allow reliance on free, signed content.
If the writer's an acknowledged authority in the field, that shouldn't
be a problem.
Oh, I agree it shouldn't. But WP:V has the line "However, caution
should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in
question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done
so", which clearly suggests we should try and avoid signed but
self-published articles even by acknowledged experts.
In effect, this is going to be similar to, for example, archives of
unpublished 'working papers' or university websites' freely available
lecture transcripts. They're around, accessible, free, and written by
experts, but we don't like using them for some reason.
RR
They said they would invite author. Thus there is a published work on at
least a related subject.
Fred