I decided I hadn't reviewed a featured article candidate for a while and Russell T Davies (writer of the Doctor Who reboot) was there. Figured I'd give it a go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_T_Davies I invite you to look, with reasonable care, at references 1 to 97. Now, not only are they from the same source but it would appear the page numbers are almost all accounted for (although I don't know how long the book is, but I'm willing to guess it's c.219 pages long). And the pages are ref'd in pretty much book order. In short, were I Aldridge & Murray I think I would be feeling pretty hard done by at this point. I should say, I don't have the book and that would be key before making a point too vehemently. Nevertheless, I wonder if we have a policy/guideline on appropriate levels of source mining? I have another interest in this. I recently purchased a book on WWI. The centenary is coming up in 2014 and there is a desire to get our WWI articles in good shape before then. I intend to use the book extensively but I am anxious about what is acceptable. Bodnotbod _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
