[WikiEN-l] Test case: policing content

Sun Mar 20 18:13:53 UTC 2005

actionforum at comcast.net wrote:

> Nah, the kooky view is too easy.  A better case would be a passage in a scientific article written by one of our inhouse experts that correctly states the basic concept of a scientific field, but in a way that hasn't been "published" because it is trivial grad student exercise the derive it, and all published work is at the bleeding edge of the field.  Imagine his/her frustration at being asked for a citation for something that is obvious, and not being able to provide one, even though he can explain it so well that even the arbitrators understand it.

> Sorry, no original research,  no insightful explanations and yes, a big hole in making the subject more accessible.

Do you have real-life examples of this happening?

I think it's important that it always remain on-topic for someone
to ask, at a given assertion or definition, for a reference for it.

As [[Wikipedia:Cite sources]] points out, it may be obvious to
*you*. But if someone comes along in five years and asks, backup
would be a very useful thing.

I've been spreading {{unreferenced}} tags with great (slightly
restrained, after the TFD nomination ;-) glee, and I see others
have taken to it too.

- d.