The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
The article fails criterion #2b "all in-line citations are from reliable sources". The article is largely based on a dubious work:
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)Please see this discussion at RSN:
Given the questionable source, the article also fails criterion #4 as being non-neutral. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 16:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
It's a bit long at 232 pages to fit in with the typical Landser literatureis not how Wikipedia establishes reliability under WP:IRS. The onus is on those who wish to use the source to present "specific evidence" that it's RS, "like an actual review", and / or that the book / author / publisher are known for editorial oversight and fact-checking. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 04:14, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
The article fails criterion #2b "all in-line citations are from reliable sources". The article is largely based on a dubious work:
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)Please see this discussion at RSN:
Given the questionable source, the article also fails criterion #4 as being non-neutral. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 16:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
It's a bit long at 232 pages to fit in with the typical Landser literatureis not how Wikipedia establishes reliability under WP:IRS. The onus is on those who wish to use the source to present "specific evidence" that it's RS, "like an actual review", and / or that the book / author / publisher are known for editorial oversight and fact-checking. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 04:14, 1 February 2019 (UTC)