3 ms·
> A while back when I needed to provide a "source" for a fact I simply tweeted it and then cited the tweet. I have to call bullshit on that. Wikipedia's notabi
by geezerjay 10y ago
> A while back when I needed to provide a "source" for a fact I simply tweeted it and then cited the tweet.
I have to call bullshit on that. Wikipedia's notability criteria specifically excludes blogs and social media as acceptable sources, with the sole exception of being posts made by the source himself (i.e., Linus Thorvald's comments on Linux posted on the lkml)
- cperciva 10y agoI have to call bullshit on that. Regardless of what the wikipedia guidelines might say, it happened.
- geezerjay 10y agoIt can only happen if somehow Wikipedia's citation process is intentionally circumvented, and if no other user ever reads the article to fix the error. If you read Wikipedia's citation guidelines, that goes against a couple of very basic rules.
- vacri 10y agoHowever, by tweeting it and referencing the tweet, you have created a breadcrumb trail for someone who wants to investigate further. Providing sources isn't just for 'factual proof', it's also for investigation - if someone is interested in a topic, they can go to referenced sources. It's the whole point of references in academic papers: "To know more, start here".