Talk:Jason Pearson

still learning?

This could use a reference, but mostly I'm wondering if it's still true; that is, it needs a date as of when this was true, so that if it was three years ago we'll know to discount it today. -- B.S. Lawrence 12:02, 2 September 2009 (EDT)

It can go, I think. This was from last year, I think, when he became Chair.--Seantubbs 12:04, 2 September 2009 (EDT)

removed unpublished reference

Removed a reference that was an email to Brian Wheeler. If it's not published, it's not a reliable source. (Or I'll start making stuff up and claiming I got emails, that I won't share, attesting the made up facts.) -- B.S. Lawrence 10:37, 3 January 2011 (EST)

I'd suggest that paid journalists get to do that in cvillepedia because we do it all the time for stories published online and in the newspaper. Some of those e-mails are public documents, some are not. Very few of those messages are republished in their entirety online to backup a sourced statement. --BrianWheeler 13:46, 3 January 2011 (EST)

I think everyone has the right to cite an e-mail, which should prompt a discussion about the reliability of sources. The e-mails can always be produced. For instance, on the Charlottesville page, I have listed how many employees the city currently has. That information came from an e-mail I received from the City's HR department (via Ric Barrick). That's a reliable source and confirms a fact that otherwise wouldn't be in cvillepedia--Sean Tubbs 13:20, 4 January 2011 (EST).

The first sentence of Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources reads (emphasis theirs): "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, ...." So if it's not published, it sure wouldn't fly there. If cvillepedia's going to digress from Wikipedia policy, I'd suggest there should be some consensus, and a specific cvillepedia policy added. If it's "cville tomorrow staff can write whatever they want", it ought to be stated as such. -- B.S. Lawrence 16:46, 4 January 2011 (EST)

Copied this discussion over to the Cvillepedia talk:Guidelines article, let's continue it there --BrianWheeler 18:28, 4 January 2011 (EST)