|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Corroborating evidence article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
How do you people come up with this stuff? Do you do this for a living?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 00:11, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a dictionary; therefore, what more can be said about corroborating evidence that makes it clear that this topic can be given more than just a dictionary definition? For example, can we add a discourse on the meaning (history, etc.) of "corroborating evidence" as an important piece of, e.g., legal jargon? --LMS
But, the organization of this topic (and others) lists a series of often obscure (to the lay reader) terms that require concise definitions to be useful. That does not make Wikipedia a dictionary because (eventually), for example, one could read a piece on "corroborating evidence" as part of a larger article on the history and use of evidence.
Could do with a discussion on to what extent corroboration is required by evidential law of different jurisdictions perhaps?22.214.171.124 18:07, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Although he does not specifically mention Wikipedia by name, Stephen Colbert refers to "open-source encyclopedias" on page 156 of I Am America (And So Can You!) and states that he believes "corroborated" should now mean "a zesty sour cream-based dip." Although there is no "corroborated" page in Wikipedia, this is the closest thing. Should it be protected against vandalism based on previous Colbert-related strikes?Mobo85 22:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
An example of corroboration
I propose to delete the second (middle) paragraph of this section.
I think the example is poor, badly-written, badly punctuated, and hard to understand. It is replete with sentences that lack a verb. It is apparently describing evidence of a crime, but it's not clear what the crime is. And it is uncited (as is the entire section), and so is eligible for deletion. However I am not proposing to delete the entire section - just the middle paragraph (which is, admittedly, the bulk of the section).
Please provide a citation, which would (a) remove that ground for deletion, and (b) provide a source that could be used to improve the section. Ideally, please improve the section.