On Dec 27, 2008, at 11:58 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: > I thought the last time I checked subjects were asked to *not* edit > their pages... And generally when they do... Someone shouts COI at > them. > > (I generally agree with subjects not dictating their pages but some of > the users that deal with COI in the past were not always that nice to > the subjects.... Anyway, I just wanted to point out that subjects > don't get THAT much leeway. St leafy not as of 3 months ago.)
Though this is irrelevant to the discussion. This problem exists primarily for externally published sources. Here's the basic situation where we hit a problem. Person A is a scholar working on Technical Subject X. Person B publishes a scholarly article in a peer-reviewed journal attacking Person A's work. Person A responds to the article at length - the venue here doesn't matter particularly, but let's say it's in a peer- reviewed journal as well. In the article [[Person A]], Person B's article is a secondary source, and can be summarized freely. But because a primary source cannot be used for claims that are not easily verified by non-specialist readers, Person A's response, which is a primary source for [[Person A]], cannot be used the same way to respond. NPOV problem. -Phil _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
