User:Veverve/Unsourced information is not valuable

Someone put some efforts chewing this chewing gum and sticking it under a table. Later, other people diligently added to this first painstaking chewed piece of gum, by adding their own work to it in the same way. It is now the amalgmation of many people's willingness and dedication to chew chewing gum and stick their used pieces of gum at the same place.
Does others having taken the time and efforts to contribute to this stain justify keeping such a filth? Should it be kept because it has been dirtying the place for so long? Should one ask before removing it? If removed, should this sticky mess be added back in the name of other people linking it and/or having contributed to it?

On Wikipedia, uncited information and information unfaithful to the cited references are not precious, nor can they be considered to be work of any value.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, adding unsourced information on Wikipedia amounts to nothing more than digital graffitis. Those unsourced additions can be due to users – among other things – forgetting to add a reference, adding something from memory they heard or read somewhere, joking, or trolling. Those additions have very real consequences outside of Wikipedia.

The removal of unsourced information is therefore completely and totally legitimate on Wikipedia: it improve articles by removing unverifiable information and prevents disinformation and misinformation from spreading.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia · View on Wikipedia

Developed by Nelliwinne