On 5/6/05, Sean Barrett <sean(a)epoptic.org> wrote:
So, to summarize, there is no policy stating that
Usenet is forbidden as
a source. Some people (you, for instance) do not consider it to be
reputable source, but nothing forbids some other people (me, for
instance) from disagreeing. And, most importantly, there is no policy
permitting anti-Usenetters to delete Usenet-based material /just
because/ it originated on Usenet.
Sean, did you read WP:NOR? For example, see this section
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOR#What_counts_as_a_reputable_publication.…,
though you also need to read the whole thing through. Also read
[[WP:NPOV]]. Both state that sources must be published by
reputable/credible publishers. I believe [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]]
says the same thing, though it's a while since I've read it. We've
also had this discussion many, many times on this list, and the
consensus seems to be that WP sources must be published and must be
credible.
The anonymous posters on Usenet are not published authors just because
they post to Usenet. So yes, any editor who wanted to delete material
sourced to Usenet would be well within their rights - except where
it's being used as a primary source about itself.
Sarah