Stephen Bain wrote:
Sure, and that's a reason to question whether a
page that's so
disputed/unstable should be linked to from a major part of the
interface. But I think his point was something in the interface saying
that completely unsourced articles are likely to be deleted is
prudent, since everyone agrees that having no sources at all is bad.
Everyone agrees that having no sources is, as a whole, bad. Not everyone
agrees that wholesale deletion is the answer, however. It would be
awfully nice if, instead of changing the culture to remove large swaths of
articles, we worked on changing the culture to actually, you know,
collaborate on getting sources. God forbid we build an encyclopedia,
after all.
And before I get three million replies - yes, it's the responsibility of
the person adding the information/advocating the retention of the
information to acquire the source. I don't disagree with that initial
responsibility at all, but I do think that we're too quick to say "oh,
well, user couldn't be bothered with sourcing, and neither can I." It's
ultimately everyone's responsibility.
-Jeff
--
If you can read this, I'm not at home.