Wikipedia talk:Attribution

Explanation

I've put up a proposal that would involve getting rid of WP:V and WP:NOR as policies, and combining them into one new policy, Wikipedia:Attribution. WP:A is taken, but it would be good if we could claim it; I've also created WP:SOURCE as a shortcut.

I've used the word "attribution" for two reasons. First, "verifiability" confuses people because usually when we verify something, we confirm that it's true, which is not how the word is being used in the policy. Secondly, the word "attribution" allows us to summarize succinctly the difference between the V policy and NOR (as they now stand): we know something is not original research if it is attributable to a reliable source — that is, if it is capable of being attributed — and all edits must be capable of being attributed. But not all edits actually have to be attributed. "The sun will rise tomorrow" does not need to be attributed, but we all know that it could be if necessary.

In conjunction with this proposal, I propose:

that WP:V be deleted;
that WP:NOR become a description of how the idea of NOR developed, with some examples of OR (not a policy or guideline)
that WP:RS be renamed Wikipedia:How to find reliable sources and become just an advisory page (not a policy or guideline), with everything that duplicates material in WP:SOURCE removed; and
that WP:CITE be renamed Wikipedia:How to cite sources, and that everything in it that discusses why we need sources be removed. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]