[WikiEN-l] Verifiability

Thu Dec 15 13:00:24 UTC 2005

Hi,
>   Is there any reason why we don't introduce immediately a 
> rule that says all new information added to an article must 
> be sourced or referenced or the edit will automatically be 
> reverted? And any new articles must be sourced or referenced 
> within two hours, say, of their creation, or will be speedily deleted?

Here's a reason: because currently probably less than 10% of material
(and maybe less than 1%) is referenced.  So we'd be throwing out almost
all changes.  And then people would start making fake references etc...

>   Unsourced information has no place on the encyclopaedia, 
> and the person introducing the information is best placed to 
> know where he got it from. OK, this idea is not a panacea - 
> it doesn't help reference up information already in the 
> encyclopaedia, but it'd stop making the problem worse. Nor 
> would it address the issue of editors making up false sources 
> - but any regular editor doing that will soon be rumbled, and 
> this issue is already around anyway. 

Does Britannica really reference *that much*?

>   Editors would soon get used to the new requirement - and 
> it'd have the benefit of making all those RC and New Pages 
> patrollers who currently do not improve the encyclopaedia one 
> jot (they merely prevent it from degrading) actually help 
> improve the project by enforcing proper standards.

I suspect lots of Wikipedia's edits are made by people who have never
even read an encyclopedia, let alone are capable of editing to that
standard.  Referencing and sourcing comes naturally to those of us who
have been to university, but for the rest?  We could possibly do
something like this if it was easier for them - maybe two comment boxes
for their changes, one that says what they did, the other that says
where it came from.  Currently the footnoting system is just a bit too
complicated for the average user.

>   This idea would start to improve our quality immediately, 
> and make a Siegenthaler repeat far less likely. Why not go for it?

IMHO, we're not ready to make such a dramatic change.  It would be like
suddenly instituting a black tie dress code at your local bar.  You
could slowly ritz up the bar to a state where people would expect that,
but if you just did it overnight, everyone would abandon you overnight.
No?

Steve