User:Octane/Wikipedia is a court room
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Wikipedia articles are blank until otherwise proven factual. |
Disclaimer
[edit]This essay was authored by an exclusionist, and will thus appear rather silly to both eventualists and inclusionists. Please don't edit this to suit your fancy; write a response in a counter-essay.
What this means
[edit]
It is useful to compare Wikipedia to a common law courtroom, where evidence must be shown to establish guilt of a crime (or in our case, truthfulness of a statement). Therefore, going further with the analogy, articles are to be presumed blank, nonexistent or without certain statements if no evidence can be shown—or if that "evidence" is total bollocks. However, Wikipedia (thankfully) does not have a double jeopardy clause, and thus statements can be reviewed again if a different (and presumably more truthful) source states such-and-such a thing.