2010/1/25 Apoc 2400 apoc2...@gmail.com:
The meme that unsourced articles are pure crap is just wrong. Some are quite
well written, but by someone who didn't know (or care?) about our sourcing
requirements.
Well, yes. The problem with unsourced BLPs is that they're dangerous
in ways that
Apoc 2400 wrote:
It is commonly said that anyone can remove unsourced information, and that
the burden lies on the editor who wants to include information to provide a
source. I have always taken this to mean that if I think something is wrong
or otherwise does not belong in the article, then
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/technology/25link.html
But Google can do something that cowboys can’t: create more real
estate. The company is sponsoring a contest to encourage students in
Tanzania and Kenya to create articles for the Swahili version of
Wikipedia, mainly by translating them
Gwern Branwen wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/technology/25link.html
But Google can do something that cowboys can’t: create more real
estate. The company is sponsoring a contest to encourage students in
Tanzania and Kenya to create articles for the Swahili version of
Wikipedia,
2010/1/25 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2010/1/25 Apoc 2400 apoc2...@gmail.com:
The meme that unsourced articles are pure crap is just wrong. Some are quite
well written, but by someone who didn't know (or care?) about our sourcing
requirements.
Well, yes. The problem with unsourced BLPs
geni wrote:
unsourced BLPs are not however dangerous in a way that sourced BLPs are not.
Face it, slogans haven't got us very far in this discussion. A BLP that
no one responsible has looked at is certainly dangerous in a way that a
BLP that some one responsible has looked at may not be.
One from the archives:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Everyking_6
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/User_talk:Everyking#Congratulations
