This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Case in point- [1] A secondary sourced claim with no original/unreferenced claim in a Pilger book is far from safe to use. Nimmo 00:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Point taken. Can you then provide evidence of an occasion when John Pilger has been proven to misquote someone? Alfonsotoastrack 18:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not neccesary that he has misquoted someone. But where we have a polemicist with a viewpoint to confirm, the fact that he seems to be drawing on internet quotes of a primary source which does not in fact exist is troubling, to say the least. Nimmo 02:43, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Well in the book he quotes the Washington post (August 30, 1999). I'm not convinced that this does not exist in the Washington Post Archives, as they charge a fee for viewing articles more than 60 days old, so I have been unable to establish whether this is legitimate or not. I assume you have paid the fee and confirmed this for yourself. I would also be sincerely grateful if you could provide examples of the "Numerous fabrications" that you claim pilger has been involved in. Thanks ( Alfonsotoastrack 13:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC))
4 months - no cite and no answer. I'm going to take this quote down and if anybody can come up with a reputable citation for it, then they can add it back in. It really seems to be to be fabricated or misattributed. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Dogabutila (
talk •
contribs) 10:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Case in point- [1] A secondary sourced claim with no original/unreferenced claim in a Pilger book is far from safe to use. Nimmo 00:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Point taken. Can you then provide evidence of an occasion when John Pilger has been proven to misquote someone? Alfonsotoastrack 18:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not neccesary that he has misquoted someone. But where we have a polemicist with a viewpoint to confirm, the fact that he seems to be drawing on internet quotes of a primary source which does not in fact exist is troubling, to say the least. Nimmo 02:43, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Well in the book he quotes the Washington post (August 30, 1999). I'm not convinced that this does not exist in the Washington Post Archives, as they charge a fee for viewing articles more than 60 days old, so I have been unable to establish whether this is legitimate or not. I assume you have paid the fee and confirmed this for yourself. I would also be sincerely grateful if you could provide examples of the "Numerous fabrications" that you claim pilger has been involved in. Thanks ( Alfonsotoastrack 13:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC))
4 months - no cite and no answer. I'm going to take this quote down and if anybody can come up with a reputable citation for it, then they can add it back in. It really seems to be to be fabricated or misattributed. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Dogabutila (
talk •
contribs) 10:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)