[Foundation-l] Sources and sourceability
Delirium
delirium at hackish.org
Fri Dec 9 20:25:33 UTC 2005
daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
>I want to outline my position here, so that there is no misunderstanding, as
>there seems to be.
>
>1. I am NOT saying that every fact in Wikipedia must be sourced or removed.
>2. I am saying that every fact in Wikipedia should be SOURCEABLE.
>3. I am not saying that everyone must give their sources whenever they edit.
>4. I am saying that we can encourage people to work on a project to find
>sources for each fact, just like we have encouraged people to fix commas or
>categorize stubs.
>5. I am not saying that people who cannot source should be discouraged from
>editing.
>6. I am saying that we should encourage people to find sources, for their
>own work and for other's work as well.
>7. I am saying that there are many different types of sources, and we should
>find ways of including them. (BTW, in a previous job I worked extensively
>with oral histories, which are a wonderful source of information, even if they
>must always be verified).
>7. Finally, I am saying that high quality is NOT something we can compromise.
>
>
That's a very nice bulleted summary of exactly what our policy on
sources should be, IMO. =]
-Mark
More information about the foundation-l
mailing list