Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-12 > 1198116084

From: "Susan Rosine" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Removal of Genetics Component of Wiki Article
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:01:24 -0700
In-Reply-To: <>

This will be my last post on the topic, because we probably shouldn't drag
on about it. I've run across many wiki articles where it says "references
needed" or statements within the article that say "refernce needed here",
etc. My question is--why doesn't someone go in and remove THOSE, they
obviously shouldn't be there; they look as though they are freeform written
(i.e., possibly <gasp> ORIGINAL WORK!!!). I can see why David Faux is
upset. Whether he did or did not go against wiki's rules, it's clear to me
that there are tons and tons of other topics on wiki that don't have any
references, and they should be completely removed per wiki's rules when it
comes right down to it. Guess they aren't as controversial as David's
contribution to wiki LOL!!

>Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:27:41 -0800 (PST)
>From: Crystal <>
>Subject: Re: [DNA] Removal of Genetics Component of Wiki Article
>Unfortunately the WIKI site clearly states that it's not for original work
>but IMO if they reference or include any work.. well .. All work at some
>point is "original"........
>Anyway IMO while one must abide by the WIKI site rule of no "original" work
>(as they are the owners)........... Regardless I don't think a brief
>assertion about his research within the subject should be excluded tho
>clearly he can't post the whole work there (as per their rules).

This thread: