> just so im clear...the process for citation needs to be like this: > Something happens online. > Mary Joe blogs about it. > we wait for someone from a traditional newspaper to call Mary Joe and quote > her. > Once the traditional newspaper publishes the quote, it's now a reliable > source. > correct? > this would mean that only is a reliable source (ir newspaper) comments > on an event will it be notable. That's strange. I didnt know that was > how wikipedia worked. Can you share the link that defines this?
Im answering my own question after researching wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability I guess the main editors at Wikipedia feel that if the major press doesnt cover a story/event....then its probably not worth doing a wikipedia entry about. am i reading this correctly? seems weird that we have a completely new art form that has developed...and we're having difficulty providing information and the backstory. Jay
