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 I can remove it at will if there is no source. I did not take it to mean that I could go from article to article and remove any sentence without a source, for no other reason than being unsourced. The exception of course if contentious material about living people, which should be removed right away if unsourced. Am I correct here? Has the interpretation changed recently?
The question came up of course because of the recent discussions about unsourced BLPs. While at first it was about BLP articles with no sources, it seems that some wants to expand it to every sentence in a BLP that does not have a source. Are we aware that this would probably mean removing well over half of the information about living people on Wikipedia? I know there are some who think it is fundamentally immoral to even have openly editable articles on living people, but how far is Wikipedia willing to go to please them? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
