Wikiversity talk:Reliable sources

From Wikiversity

[edit] Votes

• Pro Rayc 05:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
• Pro digital_me^talk 13:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
• Pro Awolf002 15:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
• Contra -- sebmol ^? 12:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• Pro --Dario vet 12:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• Contra Mirwin 13:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

• Looks good with the "whenever possible" modifier. Though get rid of all the mentions of "articles". --Rayc 05:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and clarified why "articles" showed up in the text. Hope this helps. Awolf002 15:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

• We need to develop our content first, create our own precedents and derive best practices from that. This policy is highly premature. -- sebmol ^? 12:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• It needs a bit of local evolution. Specifically the bit about verifiability is a bit overdone and puts people adding useful material on the defensive. Always appropriate to improve material by adding to it or modifying it along with a citation and explanation why. Arbitrarily deleting or moving to the talk page merely because there is no citation does not seem useful or desirable to me at this time considering our dire lack of materials. Mirwin 23:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • We don't have a dire lack of materials any more, but i think we might have to find another method of confronting erronous statements on a page. A course on evolution could be very disrubted if someone were to remove a large chunk of the text because "it was unreferenced"--Rayc 00:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Limits?

I feel that this policy, like the verifiability one, needs to have mention of limits: contexts in which reliable sources may be less important than the discussion at hand. If I come up with specific examples, I'll mention them eventually. The Jade Knight 04:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)