3 ms·
(EDITED) > An encyclopedia is a tertiary source: a roadmap and synopsis of existing sources.Non-notable sources are by definition those for which existing reli
by jessriedel 10y ago
(EDITED)
> An encyclopedia is a tertiary source: a roadmap and synopsis of existing sources.Non-notable sources are by definition those for which existing reliable sources are absent. All such articles are, in a very simple sense, "original research". One of the most basic founding principles of Wikipedia, as old as NPOV, is "no original research".... we will do so only when available sources make the job possible to do in the first place.
Why not just incorporate that into verifiability then? As I understand you, you're arguing that (1) non-notability generally implies un-verifiable, (2) Wikipedia info should be verifiable, and so (3) Wikipedia info should be notable.
Isn't it easier to demonstrate objectively that an article contains unverifiable info than it's non-notable?
- tptacek 10y agoI don't understand the question. That's what the standard in fact is.
- jessriedel 10y agoI expanded my comment for clarity. Let me know what you think.
- tptacek 10y agoThe notability guideline is part of the verifiability requirement.
- jessriedel 10y agoYes I know. Your argument sounds like you're justifying the notability guideline primarily by appealing to its implication for verifiability, and I'm asking why you don't just require verifiability (and possibly making it more stringent).