Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Workshop: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Scientizzle (talk | contribs) →Exceptional claims: I misread...here's a beter response |
|||
Line 1,953:
::::Right. Not that I've ''even once'' seen such a claim made, though the one I cited is common. ——'''[[User:Martinphi|<span style="color:#6c4408;border:1px dashed #6c4408;padding:1px;background:#ffffff;">Martin<sup>phi</sup>]]'''</span> [[User talk:Martinphi|Ψ]]~[[Special:Contributions/Martinphi|Φ]]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 02:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::Such a claim is usually made in more subtle ways. One need only spend a few days editing articles on climate change, HIV-AIDS denial, food additive or vaccine saftey, CAM, etc., in which the authoritative claims of major research organizations and extensive scientific reviews are "countered" by cherry-picked sources of a generally-more-dubious nature. It is this weight concern that is far more prevalent, and fits the ''idea'' of a "most scientists are wrong about such-and-such" edit: ideas that challenge the general scientific consensus of a field--and the sources from which they're pulled--have variable scientific validity, and to leave that validity unexamined is counter to the goals of this encyclopedia as I understand them. — [[User:Scientizzle|Scien]]''[[User talk:Scientizzle|tizzle]]'' 03:18, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::Yes, you're right. Such bad use of sourcing is rampant, from fringe, and from anti-fringe as well. I have been advocating in-text attribution to help the reader to know the context. You can't just exclude the sources, since they are ligit under the rules, but you can help frame them by noting the general relative status of the idea to begin with, and by giving in-text ATT. See the Paranormal ArbCom on Framing. ——'''[[User:Martinphi|<span style="color:#6c4408;border:1px dashed #6c4408;padding:1px;background:#ffffff;">Martin<sup>phi</sup>]]'''</span> [[User talk:Martinphi|Ψ]]~[[Special:Contributions/Martinphi|Φ]]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 03:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:'''Comment by others:'''
::Proposed. As indicated above, I believe this important point is often overlooked when people quote [[WP:V]] (or other Wikipedia policy) at each other. — [[User:Scientizzle|Scien]]''[[User talk:Scientizzle|tizzle]]'' 01:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
| |||