This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism 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 |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Yesterday, I included a reference to a recent self-published article by the British scholar of antisemitism Antony Lerman on Yale's decision to close the YIISA. Someone has now removed this, for reasons that I do not believe are appropriate.
Let's address the possible concerns about using Lerman's piece:
(i) It's a self-published source.
WP:RS gives fairly clear guidance on this point: "Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." Antony Lerman is a noted scholar in the field of antisemitism and his material has been published in many third-party publications. His piece clearly meets the minimum standard for inclusion on this regard.
(ii) It's a "POV hit piece."
This was a reason cited by User:Plot Spoiler in reverting the edit here.
The assertion that Lerman's article is a "POV hit piece" is an opinion, not a verifiable fact. Lerman is a longtime opponent of the YIISA, and his article takes a strong position against the organization. This gives his article a POV, but it does not make it a "hit piece." As long as we indicate that these are Lerman's opinions rather than uncontested facts, there is no problem on this regard either.
(iii) It "has serious BLP issues."
This was another reason cited by User:Plot Spoiler in reverting the edit. I am not aware of any BLP issues in Lerman's article; he makes critical statements toward other public figures, but I do not believe any of his comments constitute BLP concerns. Specific examples would need to be provided if we are to reject the piece for this reason. In any event, my edit did not only referenced Lerman's views on the YIISA, not his criticisms of any other public figure.
I should clarify that I am not accusing User:Plot Spoiler of acting in bad faith; I simply do not believe the reasons given for the reversion were appropriate. CJCurrie ( talk) 03:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I agree that self-published sources normally fall on the low end of the reliability spectrum, but I also think we need to evaluate each source on a case-by-case basis. Lerman is a scholar of antisemitism and his essay is written as academic commentary. It's a credible work by any reasonable standard and particularly by the standards of self-published sources. In any event, this may be a moot point: I see that Daniel Treiman has written about both Lerman and Lipstadt's reactions to the YIISA closure on the JTA site. Would you agree this is an acceptable source? CJCurrie ( talk) 01:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism 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 |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Yesterday, I included a reference to a recent self-published article by the British scholar of antisemitism Antony Lerman on Yale's decision to close the YIISA. Someone has now removed this, for reasons that I do not believe are appropriate.
Let's address the possible concerns about using Lerman's piece:
(i) It's a self-published source.
WP:RS gives fairly clear guidance on this point: "Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." Antony Lerman is a noted scholar in the field of antisemitism and his material has been published in many third-party publications. His piece clearly meets the minimum standard for inclusion on this regard.
(ii) It's a "POV hit piece."
This was a reason cited by User:Plot Spoiler in reverting the edit here.
The assertion that Lerman's article is a "POV hit piece" is an opinion, not a verifiable fact. Lerman is a longtime opponent of the YIISA, and his article takes a strong position against the organization. This gives his article a POV, but it does not make it a "hit piece." As long as we indicate that these are Lerman's opinions rather than uncontested facts, there is no problem on this regard either.
(iii) It "has serious BLP issues."
This was another reason cited by User:Plot Spoiler in reverting the edit. I am not aware of any BLP issues in Lerman's article; he makes critical statements toward other public figures, but I do not believe any of his comments constitute BLP concerns. Specific examples would need to be provided if we are to reject the piece for this reason. In any event, my edit did not only referenced Lerman's views on the YIISA, not his criticisms of any other public figure.
I should clarify that I am not accusing User:Plot Spoiler of acting in bad faith; I simply do not believe the reasons given for the reversion were appropriate. CJCurrie ( talk) 03:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I agree that self-published sources normally fall on the low end of the reliability spectrum, but I also think we need to evaluate each source on a case-by-case basis. Lerman is a scholar of antisemitism and his essay is written as academic commentary. It's a credible work by any reasonable standard and particularly by the standards of self-published sources. In any event, this may be a moot point: I see that Daniel Treiman has written about both Lerman and Lipstadt's reactions to the YIISA closure on the JTA site. Would you agree this is an acceptable source? CJCurrie ( talk) 01:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC)