As an Academic I find the whole discussion and usual Wikipedia style request for sources doubtful and sometimes even comical. Of course I understand that it's often a good thing to provide a source for a claim in online discussions, but it's neither always necessary nor is there always a burden of proof on the person who makes a claim. Especially online people often confuse arguments with explicative discourse, I certainly have made that mistake in the past. If somebody explains something to you, better listen. You should be skeptical of any claims, whether they are in books, newspapers, or online forums. It's not as if peer review or printing books somehow eradicates errors. I've seen logic books full of mistakes and sloppy reasoning.

The most important thing for anyone is to keep a mindset that is aiming towards truth. If someone doesn't have that mindset, no amount of discussion will be fruitful. It will just go round and round in circles and get lost in an orgy of bogus sources. I could virtually prove anything to someone who believes anything that has been written, by selectively looking for the fitting sources.

The lesson I've learned from Usenet: Don't argue with people online, but allow them to teach you.