[WikiEN-l] unsourced, unverifyable, weee

• Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Handling unreferenced but likely-valid material
• Next message: [WikiEN-l] unsourced, unverifyable, weee
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On the subject of the unsourced... While looking up some info on
british coinage today I ran across a cruftlink to [[Money in Harry
Potter]]. Talk about unsourced! it runs wild with rampant speculation,
routinely slips into the fictional universe, and I especially enjoy
the bit towards the end where it lapses into first person (search for
" I ").  It's bad enough that I'd probably check it carefully for
copyright violations before doing anything other than putting a
deletion notice on it.

Of course, no sources are provided for the stream of consciousness
analysis of books... although I bet someone will shove in a bunch of
fansite links.  But fixing the sourcing won't make this an acceptable
article... and I think thats something we should keep in mind:
Although we have a number of articles which unsourced but otherwise
good, there are also many articles which are unsourced but also bad in
other ways.. We risk doing ourselves a great disservice in simply
'sourcing' such articles but failing to improve their quality
otherwise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Money_in_Harry_Potter&oldid=90241281

• Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Handling unreferenced but likely-valid material
• Next message: [WikiEN-l] unsourced, unverifyable, weee
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]