[WikiEN-l] Citationgate: expertise and verifiability

Sat Sep 30 12:23:45 UTC 2006

Hi Mark, All,

Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> They certainly don't look the same, unless the person "reviewing" the 
> article utterly lacks any competence to review the article, in which 
> case they should kindly refrain from doing so.  Anyone who has even very 
> basic competence knows what is an uncontroversial statement that appears 
> in numerous textbooks in their field.

Just stumbled over another example: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance

There were also other arguments for not promoting to GA
right now (e.g. relation to the [[Italian renaissance]])
article) but prominetly cricized was the lack of in-line cites.

Heck, this is an overview article. It should only contain
current widespread consensus to be found in major textbooks.

Yes, as specific scholars are mentioned, their works can get
a footnote, but that's not primarily a WP:V issue.

Regards,
[[User:Pjacobi]]

-- 
Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen! 
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer