[WikiEN-l] original research, sources, and verification

Fri Jan 21 11:09:57 UTC 2005

JAY JG said:
>
>
>>steven l. rubenstein said:
>> > repute of sources.  Our "official policy" of "cite sources" explains
>> > that  claims should come from reputable sources,
>> >
>>Tony Sidaway replied:
>>
>>You mean [[wikipedia:cite sources]] says this?  Where does it say that
>>sources should be reputable?
>
> The policy states "More than that, you should actively search for
> authoritative references to cite".  Authoritative, in my view, means
> reputable.
>
Not in mine.  We have have seen on this mailing numerous examples of
authoritative sources that are not reputable, and you're familiar with
them yourself.  For instance, the Jeremiah Duggan article contains the
following paragraph:

The LaRouche organization strongly denies any involvement in Duggan's
death. Lyndon LaRouche himself has issued a statement saying the Duggan
affair is a "hoax" constructed by supporters of the British prime
minister, [[Tony Blair]], and the U.S. Vice-President, [[Dick Cheney]]. It
is "such an obvious fabrication that no further comment is necessary,"
said LaRouche.
[http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2004/site_packages/3125symons.html]
Here a LaRouche site is quoted appropriately because it is authoritative
on the official position taken by Lyndon LaRouche on the Jeremiah Duggan
affair.  It also happens to be quite preposterous, which in my opinion is
even better.