The discussion about the use of non-traditional sources, particularly oral sources, in Wikipedias has been around for close to a decade, yet there is no end in sight to it. It is often stated that indigenous and minority communities can set policies in Wikipedias in their own languages to be what they want and that this would be one way of being able to access their oral tradition. This, however, does nothing to address the issue of the same sources being used in the biggest Wikipedias, which are the main sources of material used in translating articles for other, smaller Wikipedias.
The absence of non-traditional sources leads to a hierarchy of cultures where those who have been provided with a Western education and can submit their work in writing to peer-reviewed journals, etc. are considered better sources than the very people whose culture, heritage, languages, people are being written about. In doing so, we also blindly trust that the peers reviewing these works know more about these subjects, even though they are also outsiders, than the communities themselves. Articles end up being one-sided and depicted and categorized mainly from the Western point of view, which clearly violates NPOV. Our job is to minimize this bias and close the knowledge gaps in articles that may not be obvious to readers who are from the same or similar demographics as the main Wikipedias’ editors are. One way of doing so would be the use of oral sources.