[WikiEN-l] Citations of Authority

Fri Jan 23 04:30:21 UTC 2004

Generally there is a near absence of citations made in most of our wars.
Mainly there is bald assertion of "authoritative" point of view, usually
accompanied by repeated references to NPOV.

Fred

> From: "Ira Stoll" <irastoll at hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 20:45:58 -0600
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Policy suggestions
> 
> == Policy suggestions ==
> 
> Most of the conflict I have had here (IMO) was due to disputes over quality
> of information (and citations), or the inclusion or exclusion of POV
> (Interpretations of said information, and citations). I'd like to propose a
> few things, which might make my job here (assuming I get to keep it) and
> yours a bit easier. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm well aware that I am
> a dubious source of information, and I don't think I'm giving orders (I'm
> pretty low on the totem pole, clearly) but I would like you to hear my
> policy suggestions.
> 
> *only replace text that you know to be wrong (inaccurate), and replace it
> with something that has a citation to back it up. If they have a reasonable
> difference, based on citation, allow both POV to be presented
> *Multiple POV '''should''' be expressed, and differing citations given. wiki
> is not paper. There is room for everyone to be heard, history shows us many
> examples of minority opinion later being found correct. There is room for
> all POV's so long as citations are given.
> *There is always room for respectable citations that differ.
> *The quality expected of the citations should be based on the number of
> editors, and thus number of citations involved. The more citations provided,
> the higher the standard (thus in an article with only one editor, a lower
> standard of citation would be expected than in an article where numerous
> editors are present and there are plentiful citations).
> *NPOV can be promoted best by providing citations of differing POV's and
> presenting said POV's in as impartial a manner as possible, thereby
> providing the highest quality, objective information possible.
> *I think some sort of forum for debate over POV should be made available, as
> there seems to be no end of desire for it among some.
> **editors who have proof of particular expertise should be considered a
> citation in and of themselves (on the subjects that they have such proof of
> expertise in).
> 
> p.s. I previously posted this on [[Wikipedia talk:Arbitrators]], and I also
> posted it on village pump and wikipedia:policy and guidelines.
> JackLynch
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Check out the new MSN 9 Dial-up — fast & reliable Internet access with prime
> features! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=dialup/home&ST=1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l