Steve Bennett wrote:
On 2/24/06, John Lee <johnleemk(a)gawab.com>
wrote:
Without sources it is [[wikipedia:original
research]] and inadmissible.
That's an extreme interpretation of that rule. We should shy aware
from removing information simply because it is unsourced. We should
only remove it if it is unsourced *and* we find it suspect.
Steve
But a discussion about a celebrity's wealth extrapolated from a bit of
trivia about how much he paid for a house. or the influence of a song on
culture based on a bit of trivia about one celebrity named after it, is
very prone to original research and/or bias. With that sort of thing,
I've learnt from experience that unless it has sources, it almost always
*is* suspect.
John