 |
 |
Sorry, if I misinterpreted the source type, I was doing 1500 things, that was 1501...my bad I learned from my mistake! Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 2, 2014, at 8:42 PM, "stuart yeates" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > On 03/02/14 13:35, BWS Johnson wrote: >>> [This also serves to illustrate why wikipedia has issues as an authority >>> control system.] >> >> I went ahead and strongarmed the templates away. Feel free to add your thoughts on the talk page. :) >> >> Wikimedians are very cool in person, and there's acknowledgement inside of the community that there are several bad actors that end up making for lots of bad experiences. So any time you run into this, revert the changes, add more sources if possible, and add to the talk page so that editors that aren't in the know should be able to read the whys of things. > > I'm the wikimedian who added the templates there in the first place to > give the newbie author some guidance as to what needed to happen; when > the newbie editor ran out of steam I appealed for input from here. > > Wikipedia is in many ways as structured as cataloguing, but you can get > away with pretty much everything if you have secondary sources. > > The fact that anyone on this list thinks that a single-column > contemporary eye-witness account qualifies as a secondary source > staggers me. Maybe that makes me a bad actor. > > [and yes, the article is still in need of secondary sources] > > cheers > stuart > -- > Stuart Yeates > Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/