User:BostonMA/Mediation/Sathya Sai Baba/Reporting Unsourced Stories

'''This page was created as part of the mediation process for the Sathya Sai Baba and related articles. The page is specifically devoted to discussion of the reporting of unsourced stories'''

Unsourced Stories Should Not Be Presented as Creditable in Wikipedia Articles
(this is still in progress, but I am saving it for the moment)

The publication of a story or a report may be a notable event, even though the story itself has not been published by a source considered reputable according to Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. For example, the National Enquirer published a story about Carol Burnett that resulted in a successful libel lawsuit by the commedienne against the tabloid. Although the publisher of the story was not a reputable publisher, the publication of the story was a notable event related to the life of the performer. The Wikipedia article Carol Burnett mentions this story as well as the lawsuit. The mediator believes that it was appropriate for the editors of the Wikipedia article Carol Burnett to mention the publication of that story even though it was published by a source not recognized as reputable per Wikipedia policies, because the story itself was notable.

The Verifiability policy states:


 * A Wikipedia article about an unreliable newspaper should not — on the grounds of needing to give examples of their published stories — repeat any claims the newspaper has made about third parties, unless the stories have been repeated by credible third-party sources.

The mediator believes that the spirit of this policy is broader than is indicated by the letter.

For example, The mediator believes that the medium in which stories have been published is not important to the principle expressed. Whether such stories are published in a newspaper, or on the internet, or in some other medium should not affect the rule described.

The mediator also believes that the justification for repeating claims which is rejected by the policy should be interpretted as an example, but not as the only justification which should rejected. The mediator believes that justification of the repetition of claims about third parties because such claims are "informative" should be equally rejected.

The mediator believes that the spirit of the policy is as follows:


 * A Wikipedia article which mentions a publisher which is not "reliable", or a story published by a source which is not "reliable" should not repeat any claims by that publisher or in that story which have been made about third parties in any manner which presents those claims as creditable, unless those claims have been repeated by credible third-party sources.