This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).
Interface administrator changes
Hi!
What can I do if I know (or strongly suspect) that something in an article is incorrect, but the piece of information has a citation that backs up the claim, and I have no citation to refute it? Right now I'm thinking in particular about the article for the film Space Monster Wangmagwi. I've recently watched the film, and some of the things in the related article don't seem correct. The article says the plot is a "space variation on the plot to King Kong", which I can say is patently not true, but the citation provided (an encyclopedia of science-fiction films) lines up with the article's description. I take similar issue with the claim that the film had 157,000 extras, but, once again, there is a citation that seems to corroborate that figure (albeit only by a passing mention).
Is there anything I can/should be doing to correct this, or similarly dubious statements in other articles? -- HumbleSolipsist1 ( talk) 11:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).
Interface administrator changes
Hi!
What can I do if I know (or strongly suspect) that something in an article is incorrect, but the piece of information has a citation that backs up the claim, and I have no citation to refute it? Right now I'm thinking in particular about the article for the film Space Monster Wangmagwi. I've recently watched the film, and some of the things in the related article don't seem correct. The article says the plot is a "space variation on the plot to King Kong", which I can say is patently not true, but the citation provided (an encyclopedia of science-fiction films) lines up with the article's description. I take similar issue with the claim that the film had 157,000 extras, but, once again, there is a citation that seems to corroborate that figure (albeit only by a passing mention).
Is there anything I can/should be doing to correct this, or similarly dubious statements in other articles? -- HumbleSolipsist1 ( talk) 11:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)