On 5/6/05, Sean Barrett <sean(a)epoptic.org>
wrote:
Just for the record, where is the policy stating
that Usenet /cannot/ be
used? I'm not being sarcastic; I genuinely
don't
know.
The relevant policies state that Wikipedia sources
must be published
sources, and that the publishers must be, in some
sense, reputable,
authoritative, and credible. These terms are
impossible to define, but
they boil down to relying on publishing houses that
have some form of
fact-checking procedure, or peer-review if it's an
academic subject.
Sometimes the degree of fact-checking will be
minimal, but there
should be some infrastructure within which
information is checked,
complaints are responded to, and obviously authors
are usually not
anonymous.
None of these things applies to Usenet. It is pretty
much the
definition of a source that should not be used
(except in very limited
circumstances as primary-source material). See
[[Wikipedia:No original
research]] for more details.
Sarah
Then all of the information about Sollog has to go,
all of the information about any Usenet celebrity
(Kibo?), all information about any Usenet news group,
unless there is '''''published''''' verification?
Does this mean we can't use links to newspaper
websites? Those aren't published, after all.
RickK
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page