[WikiEN-l] Re: New standard for citations?

Sun Aug 29 22:59:00 UTC 2004

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:48:41 -0700 (PDT), Harry Smith <lance6wins at yahoo.com> wrote:
>Copied from
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Violence_against_Israelis#Lists
>
>(posted here so I don't have to repeat myself five
>times) I dispute the factual accuracy of the various
>terrorism against Israel in {year} pages because
>sources for the reports therein are (apart from the
>word of a single Wikipedian) fragmentary or
>non-existent. I will happily withdraw the accuracy
>disputes when each item on each list is annotated
>properly. —No-One Jones 10:37, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
>
>Mirv has added the "factually disputed" tag to this
>set of articles without disputing any individual item.
>Are we to annotate each item in each article to meet
>this criteria? 

I think it's a good idea to have as much accuracy in Wikipedia, and 
backing statementys up with citations will help us be accurate.

> Are we to apply this level of citation
>to a set of articles?  Is this level of citation to
>apply to Violence against Israelis alone?

I think citations are a particularly good idea in those articles 
where accuracy or NPOV is disputed.

-- 
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than 
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)  