This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Guy Gibson article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 19, 2020. |
Index
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
There are two obvious examples of OR in this article as of 19:18, 5 August 2017 (UTC).
The first and most obvious is the citation on the Porthleven memorial "Rob Davis (from personal visit)". This is a clear breach of WP:PSTS sentence "Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material".
The second is more complicated but I think equally valid. in concerns the paragraph
Speculation persists that Gibson's Mosquito... However....
The problem is that the speculation is put forward by a secondary source. Which if reliable needs to be refuted with a secondary source. Using a primary source to refute it "However..." is I think Original Research, of the sort that fails WP:SYNTHESIS, as it is publishing a refutation of a secondary source not provided by another secondary source.
My suggested solution for these two issue is:
-- PBS ( talk) 19:18, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Why is there not a separate section on this page about Guy Gibson`s infamous arrogance and aloofness ? It is mentioned in a few of the sections but is rather buried. Almost every book I read about Bomber Command alludes to it or mentions it directly. Gibson was not a particularly popular officer (a bit like Montgomery in that regard ? ) especially, but not only with, lower ranks. His dismissive attitude to Leonard Cheshire`s VC was perhaps typical. Cheshire was also "a hero" but, of course, very much liked and respected by all ranks.-- JustinSmith ( talk) 20:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
The current entry lists "They were appalled when they were sent on a daylight Mohling raid to the Krupps in Essen" Not sure what Mohling is supposed to be my first thought was it might be morning, but I don't know enough about the topic to be sure about an accurate change. Glorantha ( talk) 20:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Honorific suffixes are a standard part of the infobox for any person. Template:Infobox military person gives no different or additional guidance. Why are these being removed as "clutter"? Surely these are essential details of Gibson's life. Martinevans123 ( talk) 22:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Guy Gibson article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 19, 2020. |
Index
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
There are two obvious examples of OR in this article as of 19:18, 5 August 2017 (UTC).
The first and most obvious is the citation on the Porthleven memorial "Rob Davis (from personal visit)". This is a clear breach of WP:PSTS sentence "Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material".
The second is more complicated but I think equally valid. in concerns the paragraph
Speculation persists that Gibson's Mosquito... However....
The problem is that the speculation is put forward by a secondary source. Which if reliable needs to be refuted with a secondary source. Using a primary source to refute it "However..." is I think Original Research, of the sort that fails WP:SYNTHESIS, as it is publishing a refutation of a secondary source not provided by another secondary source.
My suggested solution for these two issue is:
-- PBS ( talk) 19:18, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Why is there not a separate section on this page about Guy Gibson`s infamous arrogance and aloofness ? It is mentioned in a few of the sections but is rather buried. Almost every book I read about Bomber Command alludes to it or mentions it directly. Gibson was not a particularly popular officer (a bit like Montgomery in that regard ? ) especially, but not only with, lower ranks. His dismissive attitude to Leonard Cheshire`s VC was perhaps typical. Cheshire was also "a hero" but, of course, very much liked and respected by all ranks.-- JustinSmith ( talk) 20:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
The current entry lists "They were appalled when they were sent on a daylight Mohling raid to the Krupps in Essen" Not sure what Mohling is supposed to be my first thought was it might be morning, but I don't know enough about the topic to be sure about an accurate change. Glorantha ( talk) 20:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Honorific suffixes are a standard part of the infobox for any person. Template:Infobox military person gives no different or additional guidance. Why are these being removed as "clutter"? Surely these are essential details of Gibson's life. Martinevans123 ( talk) 22:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)