alt Hacker NewsWikipedia's core policy is verifiability, not truth. If you put a factual statement into an article, you're required to have a written source that Wikipedia can cite. "Someone who says they're the CEO said so on the talk page" doesn't cut it. If the CEO really wants to get this info into Wikipedia, they can go give an interview to a reputable newspaper, news website, magazine, etc., and then Wikipedia can cite that.
Which brings me to the second policy: notability. If JangaFX is really notable enough to have a Wikipedia page, then surely there will be plenty of coverage of it in secondary sources, so Wikipedia won't have to rely on talk-page statements by random editors claiming to be the CEO.
Replies
> Wikipedia's core policy is verifiability, not truth.
That is, things that a tiny clique of topic campers decides to be verifiable and truthful, are verifiable and truthful on Wikipedia. Once a decision has been made, it's close to impossible to overturn it, no matter how poorly it was justified, because that would be "disruptive".
Layers and layers of policies and guidelines are there only to obscure the fact that Wikipedia reflects what only a very small circle of chronically online weirdos want it to reflect, even if their position is utterly indefensible.
Anonymous editors are truthful?