This 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. |
Archive 260 | ← | Archive 264 | Archive 265 | Archive 266 | Archive 267 | Archive 268 | → | Archive 270 |
If this [ [1]] an RS for this passage
According to skeptic Steven Novella, a professor at Yale University School of Medicine, Sequenzia's writings under FC are unusually eloquent for a nonverbal autistic individual. He additionally stated that there is no given explanation for how she spontaneously learned to read and write at an advanced level when she was eight years old. Novella also said that he would have to personally meet her understand better.
As can be seen the inclusion of this has been marked as OR. Slatersteven ( talk) 09:43, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Salem-News, (NOT the reputable Massachusetts newspaper, The Salem News, salemnews.com), and (NOT the defunct Oregon alt Weekly Salem Weekly salemweeklynews.com). The one I'm asking about is Salem-News.com, [[Salem-News. The Salem-News bills itself as "Serving Oregon and the Pacific Northwest with Local, National and Worldwide News. The publisher is listed as Bonnie King, about whom I have found only that she is an Oregon activist who promoted RestoreHemp (a legalizaton campaign) on YouTube. Unusually for a local paper, the Salem-News has a "Cannabis" section. The other sections listed are innocuous-sounding stuff like "Road Report," "Weather", "Sports," and "Staff/". click [2] and the picture changes. This Oregon newspaper has correspondents all over the world, including 4 in Iran, 4 in Palestine, 16 in California. The list is not professionally edited: Vittorio Arrigoni is listed, although he died in 2008; "Kourosh Ziabari"'s name appears twice, reducing the number of correspondents in Iran to 3. Here's the search of his name on Wikipedia [3], and his Twitter page [4], which lists affiliations with 4 different publications, NONE of them the Salem-News. Foreign correspondents and journalists routinely list their affiliation on Twitter. I searched spot-checked the twitter pages of several writers listed s staff (many are not professional journalists, but, rather, are employed in other professions and many are described as activists,) and did not find any who mentioned the Salem-News. (Writers checked on twitter include Gilad Atzmon, Mazin Qumsiyeh) and Mamoon Alabbasi, whose twitter page [5], liss him as writing for The Arab Weekly. My suspicion is that this is less a newspaper than an aggregator of material published elsewhere, much of it unreliable propaganda for extremist and fringe points of view. At least one writer, "Dr. Alan Ned Sabrosky Ph.D. - (Professor, National & World Politics, Salem-News.com Contributor) is known as a conspiracy theorist and a writer for the propaganda and conspiracy theory website Veterans Today. Also, I cannot find any SECONDARY coverage or this local newspaper. I have created quite a few articles on local U.S. newspapers, and have sourced others that turn up at AfD (cf. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jackson Herald). In my experience, it is just about always possible to source a local paper published in the U.S. Even newish ones , defunct ones, and small ethnic papers. The fact that I cannot find anything about this paper makes me seriously doubt its reliability as a source. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 17:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Is the following a reliable new article, or is it an opinion piece per News organizations?
The article is one of three sources used to support the statement, "There have been multiple photographs of Biden engaged in what commentators considered to be inappropriate proximity to women and children, including kissing and or touching" in Joe Biden#Allegations of inappropriate physical contact.
News organizations says, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact."
TFD ( talk) 14:47, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Exceptional claims require exceptional sources. This is not an exceptional claim. There are dozens of photographs and videos of Biden exhibiting the behavior in question. There are dozens of reliable sources reporting on that behavior (vox, time, slate, salon, npr, politico, usatoday, guardian, wapo, nyt, etc). But beyond that, your argument is nonsense anyway, since what is written in our article is an opinion considered to be inappropriate
, in which case opinion articles are entirely valid to show that pov. Markowicz is an example of one person who has that opinion, of which again, there are dozens, on both sides of the isle. If you want to swap out that source for a different source, backing the same content, I would have no objection, but pretending that this is somehow weakly sourced is just posing.
ResultingConstant (
talk) 16:32, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or authorResultingConstant ( talk) 21:15, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
I agree with The Four Deuces here – since there are two other reliable sources for the statement, I don't think there's a good reason for the op-ed to be used. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 20:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Independent, self-published articles of "former Boeing flight control engineer Peter Lemme" [1] [2]
The source has been sitting in
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2019/06#satcom.guru since 27 April 2019 (*.guru urls are blacklisted).
Edit: thank you for
Marc Lacoste and
Beetstra for white-listing it. 11:30, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
The Seattle Times says "The expert, Peter Lemme, a Kirkland-based former Boeing flight-controls engineer who is now an avionics and satellite-communications consultant, has no direct personal knowledge of the airplane’s development or certification but he did a detailed analysis of the October crash of a Lion Air 737 MAX. He was extensively cited as an expert in The Seattle Times, and subsequently in multiple press accounts, including in The New York Times." [3]
Articles: Boeing 737 MAX groundings, MCAS (737), Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, Lion Air Flight 610 Aron M🍁 (➕) 15:06, 14 May 2019
Hello guys. I'm looking for some pros and cons regarding the reliability of these aviation articles. Any opinions?
Aron M🍁
(➕) 05:39, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Qualifications and relevant jobs of Peter Lemme (thanks to
Greenbe for the linkedin research):
As Avionics Engineer he worked on a "Pitch Augmentation Control System (PACS) for 767 and 757" ... "testing failure scenarios of inputs and of outputs". [3]
Related discussion: [Talk:Boeing 737 MAX groundings] ( version on 21 May 2019) — Aron M🍂 (🛄📤) 18:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Tl;dr: Further research revealed Peter Lemme is more than qualified to write articles in the context of
Avionics (specifically
Aircraft flight control systems and
Communications). His articles are also endorsed by The Seattle Times and multiple press accounts, therefore qualify as reliable
primary sources. —
Aron M🍂
(🛄📤) 18:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
References
I wrote an article about a non-notable book ( My Autobiography (Miedzianik)) by a British poet ( David Miedzianik), which cited a blogpost by an American friend of his ( Jonathan Mitchell) who had flown to England to meet him, stating that the book was in the process of being adapted to the stage but the idea fell through. This is the source and the text supported by it:
According to American autism activist and author Jonathan Mitchell, in 1992, the book was in the process of being adapted to a play, however by 1993, the plans had fallen through due to the playwright being an "amateur". [1].
Is this acceptable? The article about the book was recently PRODded, but I'd like to incorporate the text into the article about the author. Heepman1997 ( talk) 20:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
References
No, its just another blog. Slatersteven ( talk) 08:17, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Not wholly sure what to do here this [ [12]] seems to be being used on a number of music articles, as is. Not a link to the specific album, just the search engine page. I am not sure this is acceptable. Slatersteven ( talk) 14:34, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
This edit has recently been made [ [13]], but I have some doubts as to the source https://www.dailysabah.com/. My concern is that the "in depth investigative reporting" seems to consists of talking to two local tradesmen. It just seems all a bit dodgy. Slatersteven ( talk) 15:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
" The misrepresentation has not yet been addressed by the BBC or by Dooley and casts a shadow over her entire reporting career."does not seem to be supported by Daily Sabah (I'm not sure the BBC actually pulled this, and I don't see Daily Sabah being a particularly good source for a BBC journo's career - nor do I quite see it there (they do have an allusion to Der Spiegel's Relotius - but they don't make a direct tie)). I would think this needs to be attributed as a claim of dailysabah - as at present we have BBC vs. Dailysabah (RS vs. (iffy) RS - BBC being stronger here). I'll note that Daily Sabah seems to be attributing this to Hurriyet ( probably this piece, in Turkish). I will also note there are serious press freedom issues in Turkey, particularly post failed-coup - see RSF, Freedom houst. In short - bits here misrepresent the Turkish source. The Turkish source should probably only be used attributed. What's lacking is any coverage by BBC or some British source covering them (e.g. the viewers). I'll also note, and this is WP:OR, but somewhat informed OR, that this isn't necessarily Dooley's "fault" (she seems to be more of a presenter/interviewer) - but rather more a production/preparation issue - so I'm not sure I'd pin it on her bio in any event. Icewhiz ( talk) 15:14, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Can PTC Punjabi be considered reliable when it comes to BLP of actors in Cinema of Punjab? Recently, an article from the website has been used to support the "birth_name" of a subject here. Apart from their own programs, concerts and awards I don't find it to be reliable in other areas. Kindly advice. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 16:55, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Rupinder Singh Grewal(see here), and according to Hindustan Times, his real name is
Rupinder Grewal(see here). In fact, according to The Times of India, he once mentioned that his real name is
Rupinder Singh Grewal– see here. So I guess
Rupinder Singh Grewalcan be added to his BLP without any issue. - NitinMlk ( talk) 20:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Copying our articles, eg a sentence from 2007 [14] ended up in it. [15] Needs removal from these: Self-published through Trafford and here's the author's bio. [16] Doug Weller talk 13:38, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Can Elite Daily be considered a reliable source and be used as a reference? The Wikipedia entry about the news website shows a rather shady history, so I have some serious reservations regarding its use. The site has used fake names and profile photos for its writers, which seemingly led to the identity theft of a writer from Gawker. Its articles have been written by "contributors", as opposed to its own staff or journalists, which signifies the lack of a vetting process or editorial oversight of its content. It reasonably raises my concern of it being a questionable source. But to what extent is this website reliable, and to what extent, if at all, can it be used? ℯ xplicit 11:00, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Is screenrant considered a reliable source? DCBVS ( talk) 02:44, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
At Talk:The Bible and homosexuality, SharabSalam ( talk · contribs) is arguing that these two books are primary sources and that referencing them therefore constitutes original research, while I am arguing that they are secondary sources and that referencing them is appropriate. Who is right?
The account of the friendship between David and Jonathan in the Books of Samuel has been interpreted by traditional and mainstream Christians as a relationship only of affectionate regard, but has been interpreted by some authors as of a sexual nature.[13][14]
13. Boswell, John. Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe. New York: Vintage, 1994. (pp. 135–137)
14. Halperin, David M. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality. New York: Routledge, 1999
– Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 00:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
This is exactly how I see that paragraph.-- SharabSalam ( talk) 00:19, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
This notice is an update to previous discussions, listed here, pinging their creators:
More than 10,000 biographies cite or link to a self-published site that does not meet Wikipedia's requirements for reliability. The editor is not a genealogist nor is he considered a reliable source. While he does cite some reliable sources, a significant amount of it is personal correspondence, email lists, etc. The site itself says it is full of errors; I have frequently found errors or info contradictory to reliable sources. This is not a slam on Darryl Lundy who works hard to compile this, but a reminder that Wikipedia has a stricter standard. We don't accept self-published for a reason.
The first discussion in 2011 resulted in the conclusion that these sites they should not be used for living people, however, I see the site frequently cited in non-BLP articles to list descendents and heirs who are living.
My Wikipedia history proves I work extensively on these biographies, and I can tell you this biographical data is available elsewhere. The births and deaths for royals, nobilities and landed gentry are recorded extensively, to this day, by reliable sites such as Burke's and Debretts (still publishing), not to mention obituaries, and birth and death records/notices. As was pointed out before, Wikipedia editors use this site because it's more convenient to them than accessing a reliable source, whether online or at a (gasp) library. Convenience does not equal reliability.
I'm really fed up with seeing this site used as a source and it's going to take me years at this point to fix the 10,000 articles. It's time for this site to be blacklisted, with a message similar to that of the Daily Mail blacklist, to alert editors to finding a reliable source instead. —Мандичка YO 😜 13:09, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I have posted a long reply to User:Wikimandia about Darryl Lundie's website at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#thepeerage.com. Lundy usually cites his sources and many of them are reliable so I think that it is OK to use his site providing it is in line citations in the WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT format to Wikipedia reliable sources. Please read my posting at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#thepeerage.com for more details. "While he does cite some reliable sources, a significant amount of it is personal correspondence, email lists, etc." this has not been my experiance I find that most of his entries for the periods I edit tends to cite
-- PBS ( talk) 20:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
User:Wikimandia,I think you summed it up well back in 2012:
OK, so if I'm starting to understand this correctly, when I come across an article that uses the website as a reference source, I should work with the authors to improve references (by going back to the original source if available) and agree to remove any dubious information that I don't believe is likely to have originated in a published work. In a small number of circumstances it may be relevant to include an external link. Wikiwayman (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
PBS ( talk) 20:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
" Why do you assume that editor just copied from Lundy?" It was the format of the two citations given at the creation of the article. Not only are they the same ones as Lundy cites (year and edition), but the format of the citations as laid out in the two articles is almost exactly the same (compare and contrast):
I have not stated that Lundy should be used because others are which is what I think you mean by "whataboutism". I have given detailed reasons why (because of WP:PRESERVE and Wikipedia is a work in progress) it is better to analyse citations to Lundy and in descending order:
The sites I have mentioned are not "whataboutism" they are examples of genealogical sites that do not cite any sources, and in my opinion are far more questionable than Lundy, or even {{ Medieval Lands by Charles Cawley}} which falls somewhere between the two. Cawley is an unreliable source, but one that cites lots of primary sources, but in places uses them to draw inferences which if copied into an article is a SYN as it is not made by a reliable secondary source (see also WP:PSTS). My point is that Lundy in the format of SAYWHEREYOUREADIT is an acceptable interim until an editor has time to replace the citation with a reliable one. The other sites are not.
Over the years I have been through thousands of the citations to all of the websites I have mentioned in this section adding "unreliable source" templates to them. In many cases they have not been altered since I did that. I suggest that Lundy is one of the better sites because he cites his sources, and as such the use of his site can be useful in judging whether text ought to be PRESERVED.
At the start of this section it was stated "While he does cite some reliable sources, a significant amount of it is personal correspondence, email lists, etc." the use of "some" and "significant" is a biased form of wording to promote one point of view (that the the site should be blacklisted). However as the information in Lundy is supported by citations, in some cases to Wikipidia reliable sources and sometime to Wikipedia unreliable sources, rather than banning Lundy, Lundy can be an interim step (see SAYWHEREYOUREADIT) until the reliable sources are either checked or new ones provided. With the limited exception of Cawley, it is not possible to use this interim step for the other websites I have mentioned in this section.
-- PBS ( talk) 16:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Should Dexerto be added to the sourcing edit filter to strongly discourage and deprecate its use as a source on Wikipedia as per a previous discussion [18]? X-Editor ( talk) 04:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
The website uncommongroundmedia.com was registered 92 days ago with anonymized records. The site is run by UGMediaLtd a company incorporated by Dan Fisher (not the journalist Daniel Fisher). The site appears to be a rehosting of the content of conatusnews.com which is no longer active. As articles hosted at uncommongroundmedia.com significantly predate the company or website (such as dating back to 2016), these were probably not written to be published at uncommongroundmedia, but either conatusnews or similar. The site makes no attempt to distinguish which (if any) publications were submitted to their site, to those that are recycled from elsewhere. Neither is there any explanation of why conatusnews was abandoned and has been replaced by this site which "legally" has no relationship to the old site.
The site's mission is "anti-left", as confirmed by their statement "Uncommon Ground is a platform for voices critical of political orthodoxy, for secularists, feminists and activists with positions deemed inconvenient or sidelined by the more dominant left-leaning media outlets." The site has no clear editorial standard, neither does it appear to comply with UK regulations for newspapers. There is no editorial board or peer review system, instead the choice of which articles get published is down to the management team which appears to be Dan Fisher and 3 others.
This source was raised for my attention by being inserted three times as a reliable source in Get the L Out by the article's creator. The article in question is http://uncommongroundmedia.com/lesbian-campaigners-target-stonewall. The article uses a photo and video from Facebook by someone who is not the writer. The author is Jo Bartosch, who over the last couple of years has written pro-TERF (and anti-Pride and anti-Stonewall) articles on Medium, Mumsnet, lesbianalliance, feministcurrent.com and so on, making it very easy to replace this source with one of the many alternatives by the same author which are pretty much consistent and interchangeable pro-TERF lobbying editorial pieces, however as the same sentence already has 2 other sources, even that would be unnecessary. -- Fæ ( talk) 11:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
pro-TERF" is irrelevant and violates WP:NPOV. Encyclopedias don't suppress sources because they are inconvenient for the desired narrative, or because its existence upsets some editors. That the author's works are also published in other outlets is inconsequential. Pyxis Solitary yak 02:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
pro-TERF" is Pyxis Solitary. What has been stated is that Jo Bartosch has written pro-TERF articles over several years, of which their contributions to the "anti-left" Uncommon Ground are identical and easily replaceable, from sites which are neither mass recycling entire texts from other websites without attribution, and have more credible processes for editorial review.
over the last couple of years has written pro-TERF (and anti-Pride and anti-Stonewall) articles"; which was what led you to claim that UC is an "alt-right" website when you deleted it from the article (see above linked edit summaries); and which is why you insist that UC is not a RS.
contributions to the "anti-left" Uncommon Ground are identical and easily replaceable" -- not if the exact same article has not been published elsewhere in a website that you can't accuse of being "alt-right". And when did 'the Left' become the Holy Grail of honesty and accuracy? Pyxis Solitary yak 10:28, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
http://uncommongroundmedia.com/about-us/ and http://uncommongroundmedia.com/authors/ create the impression that they publish submitted content, which is reviewed by their editors. The author, Jo Bartosch, has written 14 articles with them, but has no biographical information of her own. I wouldn't use it in this case, especially if there are better alternatives. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
At this CBD RfC, it was argued that:
FP is responsible for the development of Cannabis-based products at Entourage Phytolab. AC received monetary compensation for consulting work performed for Entourage Phytolab. LdS works at Bedrocan.)
and
I have a few questions:
- What are the ground rules regarding COI and MEDRS, and RS in general?
- Is there ever the case where a paper considered to have COI is included in the encyclopedia with a disclaimer of sorts, noting the COI?
- Are we expected to dig into each study included in a meta analysis for possible COI?
Thank you, petrarchan47 คุ ก 03:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks all for the responses. Where did all the editors go, by the way?
The last time I regularly edited in the MEDRS topic area was around 3.5 years ago, and much has changed. Quite frankly, what continues to emerge from my recent noticeboard queries, besides the profound lack of activity from (the dwindling pool of) editors, is the message that 'rules' regarding sourcing are all over the map; they've become, in practice, almost entirely subjective.
For instance, Alex's opinion about this journal is not supported by outside reliable sources. It is in fact contrary to what they say. Frontiers has been "whitelisted" by the authoritative body that oversees open access journals ( DOAJ); the "blacklist" site (Beall's) that erroneously included Frontiers was taken offline immediately after an investigation into their practices was completed, and the blacklist site (Cabell's) that is now considered the go-to source for predatory journals did 'not' see fit to include Frontiers. Frontiers has the stamp of approval from the regulatory bodies that formally decide which journals are not "junk", COPE and OASPA.
Yet we have a few editors who are placing their own opinion above these outside sources, and this is 'not' being challenged. Years ago this would have at least sparked a lively conversation, and ultimately would not be allowed to stand.
I don't feel as though I have any grasp of what MEDRS will be acceptable, when personal opinions can override the normal processes editors use to determine RS. Therefore I do not feel as if I can contribute to WP in certain topic areas. This is unfair and not how WP is supposed to work. petrarchan47 คุ ก 06:35, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh FSS, will you just stop beating that WP:DEADHORSE already? How many times must you be told that Frontiers does not qualify as a WP:MEDRES, doubly so when the authors of a specific paper have an obvious COI? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:31, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
For reputably-published papers, the assumption is that the publication process adequately deals with any COI so Wikipedia editors are not in a position to revisit it.R2 ( bleep) 01:05, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
“The open-access movement is really about anti-corporatism. OA advocates want to make collective everything and eliminate private business, except for small businesses owned by the disadvantaged. They don't like the idea of profit, even though many have a large portfolio of mutual funds in their retirement accounts that invest in for-profit companies.”Beall's erroneous views of OA were debunked by his direct supervisor just prior to his retirement (Swauger, 2017)." source
I've pinged Alexbrn and WAID, but for others who are interested in following this issue, please see my addition to DGG's talk page, and note that he requests that editors allow him to weigh in on new threads to his TP first. petrarchan47 คุ ก 21:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, My request could you please confirm osianama.com site can be used as reliable citations for adding a movie name on a Wikipedia Page Movie name: Pyar Ki Jeet (1962) https://www.osianama.com/film-titles/pyar-ki-jeet-1962?classification=FILM%20TITLE&cdt=Film%20Title
About the Osianama Archive & Library are two cultural fields - Indian & World Cinema AND Modern & Contemporary Asian Fine & Popular Arts & Crafts, which include thousands of very rare and significant artworks, antiquarian books, memorabilia and documents, systematically collected over decades so as to create a meaningful knowledge-base. Thanks in advance. Yashkkaryan ( talk) 18:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)Yash Aryan [1]
References
Hi, could you please update on the above matter. Thanks. Yashkkaryan ( talk) 18:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)Yash Aryan
Thank you so much, Sir Kailash Yashkkaryan ( talk) 20:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)Yash Aryan
The Library of Congress authority files often contain biographic information on the writer, such as birth date, birth place, and academic affiliation (e.g. this one). The information that the LOC records in an authority record comes from the resources they catalog, or from references sources that they access (and accordingly list in the "sources" section). All of it is either publicly available information, or provided by the author or his publisher.
Now oftentimes, for us as Wikipedians, this is the most easily accessible source for a person's birthdate and birthplace. But there seems to be disagreement on whether this information should be equated with court records and trial transcripts and thus is violating WP:BLPPRIMARY and, by extension, WP:NOR. I would like to settle this issue here, with feedback from the community. This issue extends beyond just the LOC authority files, to any library catalog, or any biographic database that merely "reprints" a person's information without the (apparently necessary) reflection that makes for a secondary source, such as NFL.com for American football players. -- bender235 ( talk) 17:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I want to raise a side issue here about full date of birth. I think many editors think we should routinely include the full date of birth, but WP:DOB says "With identity theft a serious ongoing concern, people increasingly regard their full names and dates of birth as private. Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public. If a subject complains about our inclusion of their date of birth, or the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year, provided that there is a reliable source for it." Doug Weller talk 20:24, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Over at the newly created Jew with a coin, @ Volunteer Marek: (VM) has been removing large chunks of content based on - diff:
"It's a COATRACK for the whole disgusting and racist "Poles are anti-semities" POV into this article."[31]
"common throughout Poland."was challenged on the grounds of: "nonesense" and
"The figurines do exist but they are not common". [32] Just about every source in the article notes these figurines are common or popular. Here is a non-exhastive list:
"This artifact could be considered an ethnographic banality, were it not for the unique scale of the phenomenon24",
" ‘Jew with a coin’ outdoes any other positive mascots".
"exploded in popularity with the rise of the post-socialist tourist trade". Lehrer has also spoken - here and here (and in multiple other places).
"The shops are full of dubious tchotchkes, rows of carved wooden figures of stereotypical Jews. Very popular are zydki, bearded little "lucky" Jews carrying a bag of loot, counting money, or just holding a coin. I read there's a tradition of turning your lucky Jew over on the Sabbath so their money falls out. Some take them along to football games for luck. If your team doesn't win it's the Jew's fault."
"They are so popular that they make common wedding and housewarming gifts."- JTA /TOI 2018
" they became particularly popular after the fall of Communism",
"Dr Shimon Samuels, Director for International Relations at the Simon Wiesenthal Centre: ... "They are sold in huge numbers outside football matches""
"This stereotypical depiction is thus controversial, although it seems quite innocent next to the common and widespread phenomenon of the Zydki – the figures of a Jew holding a coin, thought to be a talisman that brings good fortune and wealth, which has overtaken nearly all other such depictions."- Haaretz 2014.
"I discovered that “lucky Jew statues” ... — are all the rage",
"The statues are commonly given as gifts on special occasions, such as to mark a new job or moving to a new house".
" Many such pieces have been produced in Poland in recent decades.".
"one display case is filled with “lucky Jews” — little clay figurines of Orthodox Jews clutching a shiny coin, which are popular across Poland.".
"Zydkis all over".
"Wooden and clay statuettes, known to Poles as “Zydki,” little Jews, populate homes and shops across the country, and far outnumber the remnants of a once populous Jewish community."
Outside input appreciated - are leading scholars in the field and WP:NEWSORGs such as New York Times and Haaretz reliable? Icewhiz ( talk) 07:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
"Comparative literature is an academic field dealing with the study of literature and cultural expression across linguistic, national, and disciplinary boundaries.".
"The interdisciplinary nature of the field means that comparatists typically exhibit acquaintance with sociology, history, anthropology, translation studies, critical theory, cultural studies, and religious studies. As a result, comparative literature programs within universities may be designed by scholars drawn from several such departments". Per Brown's department -
"The department performs a role similar to that of the study of international relations, but works with languages and artistic traditions, so as to understand cultures “from the inside.”. Icewhiz ( talk) 10:10, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Boys, girls, and everyone in between: let's not play dumb, okay? It's a Jew with a coin. You don't have to be a genius to see the antisemitic connection. If there was any plausible and benign explanation to this imagery it would've been present in literature, film, poetry, daily lingo, wholesale packages and collectible cards. Whatever Keff is or isn't an expert on, she and all of the other dozen sources say the same, as will any sane person who hasn't been living in a cave for the last 2,000 years. This isn't some tiny nuance we're talking about, but the oldest antisemitic stereotype in existence, and anyone editing in these fields should be able to recognize it in an instant. The same goes for antisemitism in Poland - we don't need to be XTRA BLP CAREFUL in stating it exists - it's kind of well known and not exactly recent. As long as we don't make sweeping generalization or OR, this is about as straightforward as it can be. François Robere ( talk) 23:53, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
"Żyd z pieniążkiem jest patronem finansowego powodzenia. „Żyd w sieni, pieniądz w kieszeni” – głosi hasło. Kiedy go widzę w domach, sklepach, w galeriach z artystycznymi przedmiotami – czuję się źle"-
"A Jew with a coin is the patron of financial success. "A Jew in the hall, money in his pocket," says the slogan. When I see it in homes, shops, galleries with artistic objects - I feel bad"clearly stating the subject of the article. The article then treats Polish stereotyping of Jews, before turning back to Jew with a coin in the last section, where it says:
"W Polsce najczęściej antysemityzm nie jest rozpoznawany jako antysemityzm, czyli jako własny, wrogi wobec pewnej grupy mit czy zestaw stereotypów. Jednocześnie treści tego mitu są ogromnie popularne i nadal bierze się je za fakty. I tak trwa powielanie mitów oraz stereotypów, aż do poczucia oczywistości, czyli w sumie do braku refleksji, do otępienia. Jedyną skuteczną odpowiedzią na to byłaby edukacja, ale jej nie ma. Za to powielanie stereotypu zachodzi w wielu miejscach, głównie w Kościele. Jedynie z tych powodów wizerunek Żyda z pieniążkiem może w Polsce uchodzić za neutralny. Ale naprawdę jest on wpisany w długi szereg antysemickich wizerunków: jest w nich Żyd kuzyn świni (Judensau), Żyd diabeł, Żyd czarownik, Żydzi wytaczający krew z dziecka, Żyd gruby kapitalista z cygarem, Żyd chudy bolszewik z nożem, Żyd Trocki ...- (google translate) -
"In Poland, the most common anti-Semitism is not recognized as anti-Semitism, ie as its own, hostile to a certain group of myths or a set of stereotypes. At the same time, the contents of this myth are extremely popular and are still taken as facts. And so it continues to duplicate myths and stereotypes, to the feeling of obviousness, that is, to the lack of reflection, to dullness. The only effective answer to this would be education, but it is not. For this, stereotyping takes place in many places, mainly in the Church. It is only for these reasons that the image of a Jew with a coin may be regarded as neutral in Poland. But he is really inscribed in a long series of anti-Semitic images: a Jew, a cousin of a pig (Judensau), a Jew, a devil, a Jewish sorcerer, Jews baptizing blood from a child, a Jew a fat capitalist with a cigar, a Jew a skinny Bolshevik with a knife, a Jew named Trotsky ...". She's rather clear about it. I suppose objecting to what is written black on white in Polish shares a common thread with opposing multiple, clearly reliable, English language sources that state other facts. Icewhiz ( talk) 05:05, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
One more source: According to a 2018 survey conducted at the Center for Prejudice Research at the University of Warsaw, [1] the following percentages of Poles either "agree" or "definitely agree" that:
Marek, you're fighting for the wrong causes. François Robere ( talk) 12:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
References
I wonder if anyone who has not previously edited some aspect of the Jews and Poland question would care to comment? Slatersteven ( talk) 13:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Une enquête réalisée en mai-juin 2015 par Paweł Dobrosielski, Piotr Majewski et Justyna Nowak confirme l’importance de la diffusion de l’image du « Juif à la pièce d’argent » : 65 % des enquêtés l’identifient, 55 % l’ayant vu chez des amis ou dans la famille, 26 % dans le commerce tandis que 18 % en possèdent une chez soi5. L’âge semble sans incidence sur ce niveau de reconnaissance, ce qui tend à confirmer que cette pratique est récente, toutes les générations y ayant été introduites en même temps. Cette image n’est pas que répandue : un enquêté sur deux l’associe à la superstition selon laquelle elle apporte la fortune. Mais son usage à proprement parler ne suit pas automatiquement. D’après Paweł Dobrosielski, « seuls » 24 % des enquêtés savent qu’il faut placer un grosz derrière le cadre et 13 % qu’il faut le retourner le jour du shabbat6-(google translate) -
"A survey conducted in May-June 2015 by Paweł Dobrosielski, Piotr Majewski and Justyna Nowak confirms the importance of spreading the image of the "Jew to the silver coin": 65% of respondents identify it, 55% l having seen friends or family, 26% in commerce while 18% have one at home5. Age does not seem to affect this level of recognition, which tends to confirm that this practice is recent, as all generations were introduced at the same time. This image is not only widespread: one respondent in two associates it with the superstition according to which it brings fortune. But its use strictly speaking does not follow automatically. According to Paweł Dobrosielski, "only" 24% of respondents know that you have to put a grosz behind the frame and 13% that you have to return it on the Sabbath6. So - 18% at their home. Common and widespread. Icewhiz ( talk) 13:55, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
For the past few weeks the page Polish Jews has seen back and forth reverts over the inclusion of this source ( bibliographical entry). It's a book collecting essays by a number of historians (mostly Polish) or Polish expats, ex. Chodakiewicz himself, Piotr Gontarczyk, Peter Stachura, John Radzilowski, Waldemar Chrostowski) on Polish Jewish history. It has been challenged mostly by User:Icewhiz who pointed out (and who'll likely elaborate on his criticism shortly) that: 1) one of the two co-editors for this, Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, has been described by some sources as right-wing activist (my counter: he is nonetheless a professor at some American institutions, his works are cited and reviewed in international academia). The other co-editor for this is relatively uncontroversial Polish scholar Wojciech Muszyński 2) the book seems to have received two relatively negative academic reviews (seen in the paragraph describing this book at MJC bio page; another review [34] has been claimed to be negative as well, but I don't have a copy of it and Icewhiz did not reply to my request to share his copy of it that was posted on the Talk:Polish Jews; I'll also note that this particular review by Krzywiec might be in turn criticized in the letter to the editor published here). The only positive review I've found is non-acdemic in Polish-langage popular history Histmag web magazine/portal. My reply to the relatively negative reviews found is that while the book has been described as having an agenda (likely, right wing and Polish nationalistic), it is nonetheless cited and engaged with by other scholars as part of an academic discourse, and the reviews, while pointing out that bias, are themselves also likely biased, and the do not suggest that this is some Holocaust denial revisionist crap - just a biased, but not unreliable, collection of essays. 3) Finally, Icewhiz has pointed that the book is published by Leopold Press, a small printing press associated with the Institute of World Politics, and that Leopold Press is run by Chodakiewicz, thus raising an issue of potential self-publishing. My reply to this is that it's a minor, but still, academic press, and that while there is some minor COI here, we have no proof that peer review or such were not done. (Polish edition of the book was released by a minor publishing house the facto that I can't find much about, so it's not a great sign, I'll admit). Overall, however, my view is that the book is not self-published (a number of reverts just argued 'removing SPS' and such) and that it can be cited, as long as the author of a particular essay is clearly attributed for any statement that may be seen as controversial or extraordinary. Further comments appreciated. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:56, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
"The holder of the Kościuszko Chair at IWP, Dr. Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, is the Publisher of Leopolis Press.". A search in worldcat brings up approx. 5 books "published" under this label - a significant chunk of them with Chodakiewicz listed as an author.
"In the Polish People's Republic, under Soviet occupation, my family taught me not to be afraid, I will not be afraid in the USA. For now, they do not put in jail, like my father, even for Solidarity, or grandparents for AK and PSL. I have neo-Stalinists and other leftists and, in general, the forces of evil in the nose in every latitude".
"Chodakiewicz is a frequent contributor to several Polish publications, such as the weekly Najwyzszy Czas! (The Time is Now!). That's the magazine of the Real Politics Union party, a fringe, pro-life, anti-gay marriage, pro-property rights, anti-income tax group. It often uses anti-Semitic stereotypes on its pages, according to a Tel Aviv University global "Anti-Semitism Survey." It was in this magazine, in November 2007, that he wrote critically about gays. "If everything is equal, if there is no difference, for example, between Christianity and cannibalism, then — according to the argument of those who have an interest in it — homosexuals should be treated as a norm, so they should have equal rights. In reality it is not about equal rights, but about special privileges. The biological norm is about prolonging the species. A deviation from the norm can not be a norm.". [3] Najwyzszy Czas! is noted by others to have published convicted Holocaust denier Dariusz Ratajczak frequently. [5] He has written that Obama was
"Muslim, a radical, and a friend and protégé of communists", [3] Speaking at a far-right rally in Poland, he said: "We want a Catholic Poland, not a Bolshevik one, not multicultural or gay!" [2] Per the SPLC he has also written on the White genocide conspiracy theory. [3]
"there are conspiracies everywhere in this book, but the author offers no names, no institutions, no objectives, and no strategies". [6] His views on Jews -
"Chodakiewicz's work represents the most extreme spectrum in what is considered the contemporary mainstream ethno-nationalist school of history writing[7],
"Chodakiewicz is perhaps the first historian in the postcommunist period who consistently casts Polish-Jewish relations in terms of conflict and uses conflication as an explanation and justfication of anti-Jewish violence in modern Poland"[8]
"It seems that it is not a coincidence that [Barbara] Gorczycka-Muszyńska has the same surname as another author and editor of the collection"(and I was unable, as Krzywiec was unable, to find any publications from her in an academic context), another author - Tania C. Mastrapa - runs
"Mastrapa Consultants – a company, which according to her short biography, restitutes property on Cuba"and authored a chapter comparing Cuban property to the situation post-war Poland (the author of the journal article deemed fit to sarcastically quote this from the book -
"The situation in Cuba is in a way similar to the situation of humiliated wives in the past. It often happened that the husband, who constrained his wife, did not let her study, work outside home or drive a car. Her role was to work, obviously for free, for the sake of the family. She was not allowed to participate in making budget decisions or any other decisions for the money belonged to the husband. Such a woman lived devoid of respect and dignity. In turn the husband wanted her ..... Similarly to that endangered husband who wants to criticize his wife and does not want to give her personal freedom, the Castro regime does not want its property (i.e. the Cubans) to be free […]. When the Cubans recover their freedom they will become lawful owners of real estate and moveable property[1] (read academic much?! Should we place this in, say, Cuba?).
"Mainly because he does not want (yes, it's a man) to meet my fate. Mark Paul has a dependent family, home and professional life". [37] How many academic works publish anonymous authors? No sane academic publisher would carry this. It bears mentioning we discussed Paul previously on RSN: RSN 241 and in this RfC (published also on RSN) decided to exclude Paul based on reliability concerns.
References
"There is something farcical about the conception of a crusade against the modern world professed by a few researchers from a marginal research centre,10 which is a recruitment pool of the CIA.11 But could this McCarthyism drenched in the East European “sauce” with the whole peculiar, local color; this “information depositary,” as Chodakiewicz and Muszyński state in the introduction, worthy of 1930s right-wing political leaflets and then slightly filtered through the 2011 Poland political correctness, survive anywhere else abroad?"
"This collection is more like the material for a seminar of linguists or even scholars of rhetoric and propaganda. The book will not be good nourishment for readers interested in the Holocaust and its third phase, i.e. the basic topics of the essays by Jan Tomasz Gross and Irena Grudzińska-Gross.. I'll also note that, as the review states, the book is very light on facts or research of any kind - it is for the most part polemic essays from a moral standpoint, and not historical writing. One of the authors is a priest (himself a topic of study in this field, the chapter is titled "Moral Dilemmas in Turbulent Times" - described as a
"pseudo-theological lecture"). We generally presume sources are unreliable unless proven otherwise - red flags around this self-published work abound. Icewhiz ( talk) 08:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
"the Institute of World Politics, a boutique graduate school for wannabe spies and national security nerds in Washington, D.C.". [39]. Icewhiz ( talk) 19:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
"This book has more errors in basic English than any other scholarly book I have read ... The Brute Polak stereotype communicates that Poles are inept, uneducated, chauvinists. The many errors in this text could be used, in the wrong hands, to support that stereotype.
"As readers will suspect, these errors are reflective of larger problems. Most grievously, ‘Golden Harvest or Hearts of Gold?’ accuses several prominent Polish-studies scholars of Stalinism"...
"Squandering Polonia's energies in fruitless witch-hunts, using paranoia to turn one Polish-American on another, prevents Polonia from uniting and responding strategically to the Brute Polak stereotype."
"Golden Harvest or Hearts of Gold? repeatedly identifies Princeton professor Jan Tomasz Gross as the source of the Brute Polak stereotype. This is factually incorrect, and it disserves Polonia. Gross' oeuvre includes a previous work, Revolution from Abroad, that educates the reader about the little-known Soviet occupation of Poland. Too, the Brute Polak stereotype existed before Jan Tomasz Gross was born"...
"Golden Harvest or Hearts of Gold? implies that Jews and leftists are responsible for the Brute Polak stereotype ..... Nothing could be further from the truth. Almost one hundred years ago, Madison Grant and Kenneth L. Roberts were just two of many anti-Communist and arch-Nordic Americans who disseminated immensely influential depictions of Brute Polaks.
"Only two of the fourteen authors are PhDs currently employed at universities. The selections do not follow the paradigm of scholarly articles: they do not advance a single thesis and then attempt to prove that thesis through original, peer-reviewed research. Rather, the articles ramble; they are replete with rhetorical questions. Necessary citations are absent. The index is woefully inadequate. The authors comment on stereotypes in popular American culture, yet none are scholars of stereotypes or of American culture, and none cite previous research on stereotypes of Poles in America.".
"The book works very hard to produce the impression that Poles have ‘hearts of Gold’ and that they weren't all that antisemitic before World War Two broke out, and that during the war Poles, for the most part, helped Jews. Perhaps the nadir of this aspect of the book is when the 1946 Kielce Pogrom is referred to using scare quotes that suggest either that the pogrom never happened, or that it was not really a pogrom (320). Ethical Poles have acknowledged since 1946 that the Kielce Pogrom happened, that it was carried out by Poles, and that patriotic Poles will resist the kind of anti-Semitism that produced it."
Oh ffs. WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT is not a sufficient reason to declare a source not-RS. A source may be biased and still be reliable. If there are concerns about bias, then we just make sure to attribute. This is an academic source and easily qualifies for reliability. This is, like, RS101. The notion that it's not reliable is ridiculous and reflection of Icewhiz's WP:TENDENTIOUS approach to editing in this area, nothing more. Volunteer Marek ( talk) 15:04, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm going to repeat myself... "I'm failing to see WHAT this source is attempting to be used for - the exact information. I tried looking on the talk page but it was the usual mess of accusations/edit warring/long posts with little actual content relating to the article. Please, someone post the exact information that this source is being proposed to be used for." ... would the various parties stop discussing each other and answer the question... briefly and succiently. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
The Polish government enacted legislation on "abandoned property", placing severe limitations on inheritance not present in pre-war inheritance law which allowed inheritance by second-degree relatives, limiting restitution to the original owners or direct heirs. The unprecedented rate of extermination of Polish Jews in conjunction with the fact that only Jewish property was officially confiscated by the Nazis suggests "abandoned property" was equivalent to "Jewish property". [1] Polish officials did not conceal this, the formulators of the law argued that it was necessary to prevent wealth concentration in the hands of "unproductive and parasite factors". [1] The initial 1945 decrees were superseded by a 1946 law, [2] with a claims deadline of 31 December 1947 (later extended to 31 December 1948) after which property devolved to the Polish state. [3] Even if Jews regained de-jure control, when it was occupied by Poles additional lengthy proceedings were required. [4] The majority of Jewish claimants could not afford the restitution process without financial help due to the filing costs, legal fees, and inheritance tax. [5] Many surviving Polish Jews in the USSR were repatriated only after the end of the claims deadline in 1948, and Polish officials blocked return of Jews from DP camps. [3] While it is hard to estimate how many Jews got property back, the number was extremely small. [6]
References
with various other content - some of which is sourced to Polish language microhistories (those I've attempted to verify - e.g. Talk:History of the Jews in Poland#Krzyżanowski and Talk:History of the Jews in Poland#Skibińska actually have opposite conclusions) and some of which is sourced to Hearts of gold (which I did not attempt to verify - as this non-academic text self-published by a SPLC designated individual is not remotely reliable) - the bits sourced from Heats of gold read:
Successive restitution laws on “abandoned property” of March 2, 1945, May 6, 1945 and March 8, 1946, which remained in effect until the end of 1948, allowed property owners who had been dispossessed during the war or, if deceased, their relatives, whether residing in Poland or outside the country, to reclaim privately owned property that was not subject to nationalization by way of a simplified, expedited and far less expensive procedure than the regular civil procedures. [1] Until remaining abandoned properties became nationalized at the end of 1955, such persons, as well as more distant relatives, could claim property of deceased owners under the regular civil procedures. [2] [3]
Although municipal court rulings did not confer immediate ownership on someone who was not a dispossessed owner, successful claimants were able to sell the properties immediately following revendication. [4]
References
"The holder of the Kościuszko Chair at IWP, Dr. Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, is the Publisher of Leopolis Press.". The judge, AFAICT, never published anything else in an academic context (Also noted by the journal article (on Golden Hearts) that says she has the same surname as an editor of this piece). Icewhiz ( talk) 04:53, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
"a thoroughly discredited and corrupt organization"- it is generally a well-respected organization for far-right figures in the North America - we've had multiple discussions on the subject. One should note that Teresa Prekerowa died in 1998 - some 13 years prior to this book published by Chodakiewicz - the appearance of a reprint of her much earlier work - is not a postmortem endorsement of Chodakiewicz's book by Prekerowa. Icewhiz ( talk) 16:46, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Tatzref (and others), much of your wall of text is unreadable or deals with other editors, which is not the point of this board. Please re-read the edit notice you get when you edit this board ... the one that says "Before posting, please be sure to include any of the following information that is available:" This board is set up to discuss issues of reliablity for specific information - not to discuss editor conduct. You'll find that you get much better results if you stick to a brief presentation without mentioning other editors. If the wall of text has indeed just been copied from somewhere else, that's not helpful at all. Want to know why no other editors besides myself have weighed in? It's the endless walls of text and constant bickering between editors on all sides. Until that stops, few uninvolved editors will be willing to deal with the situation. If the opinons of this board are really wanted, everyone involved should seriously try to change their behavior. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
There is a dispute on the article Lee J. Carter over use of the term "red-baiting". Here is the text in question, from [49]:
Carter has been red-baited by Republicans as well as centrist Democrats for his democratic socialist ideology,
sourced to [50], [51], [52], [53] [54], [55], [56]. Three of these sources use the term "red-baiting": a tweet from reporter Graham Moomaw, an article from Slate quotes a tweet where Annie Shields, an editor at The Nation, uses the term, and an interview with Jacobin. The Jacobin article and the tweet in Slate refer specifically to his republican election opponent, while only the Graham Moomaw tweet says democrats are doing it as well. Do these sources support use of the term "red-baiting"? Do they support the part that says that centrist Democrats did it too? Red Rock Canyon ( talk) 00:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment: Please note that IP is forum shopping as they originally claimed this was a BLP violation and posted about it on ANI two days ago and was told it is no violation. They are now posting here to try to get their personal preference reflected in the article. IP has been combative, insulting, and outright lying, to say nothing of openly flouting several rules such as edit-warring in lieu of finding consensus on the talk page per BRD (and as requested numerous times over the past three weeks). They are an SPA (though they only just now started editing "random page" articles perfunctorily to remove that allegation) and I strongly suspect that they have a COI with regards to the other delegate mentioned in the Carter article, Mark Keam, which they have not yet denied on the talk page. JesseRafe ( talk) 12:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Is there an accepted term for the equivalent of “red-baiting” - but aimed at those on the other end of the political spectrum? (ie, where the target is accused of being a fascist or similar, etc.) Blueboar ( talk) 17:45, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I have an anon arguing that https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/lacey-sturm.html is a reliable source for Lacey Sturm's birth date. I argued that does not appear to be a reliable source. There is no list of staff, no list of editorial policy, there is no source for the information that is provided (author), no way to submit corrections, and if there was, how that would be vetted. Can this source be used for this birth date? Can the site be used for any birth date? Can it be used for any details about a BLP? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 20:49, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I've been removing it on sight for a few years now, after a RSN discussion at that time. From what I've seen, the information they use appears to come from publicists or scraping. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:38, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Consider using something self-published (by her), if it exists. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 09:05, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello all. Here is the question: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Teahouse#Identifying_reliable_sources Does anyone have an answer? Puduḫepa ( talk) 11:19, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
I added a section on the cursing of Ali to this page Muhammad bin Qasim and it was removed all together. Following is the reference and the passage:-
References:-
[1] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib", Volume 7, page 226, serial no. 413.
[2] Derryl N. MacLean, "Religion and Society in Arab Sind", page 126, E. J. Brill (1989).
"Al-Hajjāj, wrote to Muhammad bin Qasim Thaqafi to summon Atiyya and ask him to curse Ali ibn Abi Talib and, in the event of his refusal to do so, to slash him four hundred times and to shave his head and beard. Muhammad summoned Atiyya and read over al-Hajjāj's letter to him so that he might choose one of the two alternatives. Atiyya declined to curse Ali and agreed to the alternative".
The first book that I referred to is one of the key source books in Hadith science. Scholars consult it when they discuss authenticity of a Hadith. The second one is a secondary source, published in 1989.
Cursing of Ali is a well established Umayyad tradition and it is a sign of discrimination against Shia muslims, which was quite common in Umayyad times. This historical fact is very important to be mentioned in the article, with reference.
Hereby a link to Tahdhib al Tahdhib at wikisource:-
And the wikipedia page of this author Ibn Hajar:- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Hajar_al-%E2%80%98Asqalani
Dr. Hamza Ebrahim ( talk) 22:43, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Neither journal appears at WP:SOURCEWATCH or WP:RSP. Both exclusively publish racist pseudo-science that wouldn't fly anywhere else, and the majority of their articles are written by members of their own respective editorial boards: 6 of the 9 articles in the most recent TOQ are written by members of their staff, and Richard Lynn somehow managed to co-author 7 out of the 12 articles in this issue of Mankind Quarterly while simultaneously serving as the editor-in-chief. This makes it unlikely that they are subject to anything resembling actual peer review.
I only found brief mentions of The Occidental Quarterly in the WP:RSN archives. Here are the previous discussions of Mankind Quarterly:
At a minimum it seems like these would be worth including at WP:SOURCEWATCH. Nblund talk 20:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Mankind Quarterly gets include in
WP:SOURCEWATCH through
(currently entry 13). The Occidental Quarterly doesn't get picked up, because there are no categorization that marks it as unreliable. We could easily have a blanket "questionable" categorization on the alt-right movement, if that's desired, or it could categorized in something like Category:Pseudo-scholarship/ Category:Scientific racism/ Category:Conspiracist media or whatever else is appropriate and get flagged as problematic for those reasons.
Both could have a specific entry, but I didn't seek individual crap publications save for those that had an entry at WP:RSP (to document consensus), or those I stumbled upon accompanied by a reliable source calling them crap. If you have reputable sources calling them crap/nonsense, just post links here and I'll add them. Unless you want an RSP listing or whatever. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 03:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Is This a valid source
https://www.troikatalent.com/antonia-clarke
Page intented to be Used on: Antonia Clarke 6equj5 2444 ( talk) 15:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)6equj5 2444
I would like to request for comment for a source for Just Jared, which is reliable, unreliable, nor depreciated. Because this website Just Jared is listed as spam on the Wikipedia blacklist. -- 119.94.169.139 ( talk) 14:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
"Celebrity Gossip"site, and Wikipedia generally avoids gossip. Most of the content on Just Jared references other websites, and you can cite these other websites if they are reliable. — Newslinger talk 20:41, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Is imdb a reliable source for sections such as filmography and career when there are no other substitutes(which are reliable) page intended to be used on Antonia Clarke 6equj5 2444 ( talk) 19:50, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
No, whilst some of it may be primary a lot of it is user generated. Slatersteven ( talk) 09:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it OK to use The New Iranian Leadership book [1] for following material in People's Mujahedin of Iran article? Thanks, Saff V. ( talk) 11:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
In May 2005, Iran's
Ministry of Intelligence ran a disinformation operation against the MEK by deceiving
Human Rights Watch into "publishing a report detailing alleged human rights abuses committed by MEK leadership against dissident members. The report was allegedly based upon information provided to HRW by known Iranian MOIS agents who were former MEK members working for the Iranian Intelligence service."
References
Is The Next Web ( RSP entry) article "Online assessment and training platform ProProfs passes 1 million registered content-makers" a reliable source for ProProfs? Specifically, does this article help establish the company's notability?
Previous discussions of The Next Web:
Personally, I think this article is extremely promotional, and looks like a lightly retouched press release without any additional research from the author. I would not count this article toward the company's notability. — Newslinger talk 06:16, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Yet, the source is reliable indeed and had been acquired by the Financial Times as David Gerard said. RossK 16:02, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
"routine coverage"piece tied to a company metric ( registered users). — Newslinger talk 21:08, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Well, according to their focus they describe new technologies and many of their articles have the same format and dry style of featuring new companies. I don't say it is the best source but "The Next Web" is well known in technological world and is reliable. The Financial Times would buy yellow press from the street. I just want to accentuate that this is normal style for many technological magazines nowadays for specific business niche. Ross kramerov
Is this a blog or something? -- valereee ( talk) 13:10, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
The reliability of Human Events has been discussed before [59] [60], but this was before the publication shut down in February 2013 and the Human Events website has now re-launched with a new editor-in-chief, Raheem Kassam. Because of this, I think the reliability of Human Events in general should be revisited. X-Editor ( talk) 16:15, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
On 14 August 2017, Kassam published his book No Go Zones: How Sharia Law Is Coming to a Neighborhood Near You— the entire bullshit concept of "no-go zones" has long been debunked, and if that's the standard of journalism expected from him... nope. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 16:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Is Behind the Name considered a reliable source? The about page [61] lists its own sources, but it's not clear on any particular name page which sources were used. Asked because Planets in astrology uses it as a source for the meaning of Venus.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zojomars ( talk • contribs) 12:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Is Logically Fallacious ( logicallyfallacious.com), a book and website by Bo Bennett, a reliable source? The domain is cited in multiple articles about fallacies. The book was self-published by Bennett through eBookIt.com. The website was quoted in Fortune's "Food industry, its critics are cynical by 'nature'", but I don't think Bennett is an established subject-matter expert. — Newslinger talk 21:26, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, our old friend Medical Hypotheses, which comes up at RSN periodically [62] [63] [64] [65] and is consistently found to be not an RS, let alone in any way a MEDRS. Some of us go through and look for abuses of it as a medical source periodically (cc JzG).
It turns out that there's lots of links to it via its DOIs - I'm finding a lot by searching on "j.mehy" or just "mehy". Uses of it to support medical claims should almost certainly be removed. I'm just going through a pile now.
Should it be listed in perennial sources, as one to avoid? The only uses I can think of which would be justified would be in something like a biography concerning an author, e.g. it's very relevant to Peter Duesberg - David Gerard ( talk) 17:47, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Is this Dutch newspaper a reliable source? I understand it is published in tabloid format, but I also read that most Dutch newspapers switched to that format."On 30 March 2003. Het Parool became the first newspaper in the Netherlands to switch from broadsheet to tabloid format, a move which since has been followed by all other major and local newspapers in the country."
On Desmond is Amazing I’d like to use the following,
El Periódico de Catalunya, and The Feed, states he is the most famous "drag kid" in the world, [1] [2] Los Replicantes states he is the youngest professional drag queen in the world. [3]
Is this appropriate? Gleeanon409 ( talk) 20:56, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
I found another one but I’m not sure how these statements could be integrated. 1. “Being one of the youngest drag stars of all time (which has led him to the runway for The Blonds and Gypsy Sport, as well as campaigns for brands like SPKTRM Beauty and Converse), you can’t help but acknowledge the fact that you are far from the usual.” And 2.”He’s built a reputation for not only being one of the youngest drag queens in the world, but for being one of the most woke.” [4] Gleeanon409 ( talk) 15:19, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Here’s that full paragraph, “He’s built a reputation for not only being one of the youngest drag queens in the world, but for being one of the most woke. While other 11 year olds are stressed over their summer reading lists, Desmond is writing a book — no, not an overplayed, obligatory celeb “tell all” memoir, but an in-depth historical collection of the LGBTQ+ community, and his perspective on the future of the community. As other kids get excited for summer vacation, Desmond is preparing for a lengthy PRIDE month ahead: on top of creating the first-ever youth drag house, House of Amazing, he’s acting as Grand Marshall to Brooklyn PRIDE, and has a few “under wraps” projects coming out, all while trying to finish his school year.” From woke, it’s a political term of African American origin that refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. Gleeanon409 ( talk) 16:20, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
References
From Google translator [66] “Desmond is Amazing, the world's most famous drag kid (Title of article) With only 11 years, this small model and LGTBI activist from Manhattan wants to inspire other young people to be "incredible" like him” “At 11 years old he is a well-known LGBT activist and one of the most famous drag queens.”
Okay, in case the translation was an issue, I’ve included the translation link, relevant title of article and quotes. Is this source acceptable? Gleeanon409 ( talk) 21:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
i have been watching out this online News Portal from Nepal called Kathmandu Tribune article from this portal is cited on many Wikipedia pages, so i want to know news on it is considered as Reliable or not [67] Shringhringshring ( talk) 20:08, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
This 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. |
Archive 260 | ← | Archive 264 | Archive 265 | Archive 266 | Archive 267 | Archive 268 | → | Archive 270 |
If this [ [1]] an RS for this passage
According to skeptic Steven Novella, a professor at Yale University School of Medicine, Sequenzia's writings under FC are unusually eloquent for a nonverbal autistic individual. He additionally stated that there is no given explanation for how she spontaneously learned to read and write at an advanced level when she was eight years old. Novella also said that he would have to personally meet her understand better.
As can be seen the inclusion of this has been marked as OR. Slatersteven ( talk) 09:43, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Salem-News, (NOT the reputable Massachusetts newspaper, The Salem News, salemnews.com), and (NOT the defunct Oregon alt Weekly Salem Weekly salemweeklynews.com). The one I'm asking about is Salem-News.com, [[Salem-News. The Salem-News bills itself as "Serving Oregon and the Pacific Northwest with Local, National and Worldwide News. The publisher is listed as Bonnie King, about whom I have found only that she is an Oregon activist who promoted RestoreHemp (a legalizaton campaign) on YouTube. Unusually for a local paper, the Salem-News has a "Cannabis" section. The other sections listed are innocuous-sounding stuff like "Road Report," "Weather", "Sports," and "Staff/". click [2] and the picture changes. This Oregon newspaper has correspondents all over the world, including 4 in Iran, 4 in Palestine, 16 in California. The list is not professionally edited: Vittorio Arrigoni is listed, although he died in 2008; "Kourosh Ziabari"'s name appears twice, reducing the number of correspondents in Iran to 3. Here's the search of his name on Wikipedia [3], and his Twitter page [4], which lists affiliations with 4 different publications, NONE of them the Salem-News. Foreign correspondents and journalists routinely list their affiliation on Twitter. I searched spot-checked the twitter pages of several writers listed s staff (many are not professional journalists, but, rather, are employed in other professions and many are described as activists,) and did not find any who mentioned the Salem-News. (Writers checked on twitter include Gilad Atzmon, Mazin Qumsiyeh) and Mamoon Alabbasi, whose twitter page [5], liss him as writing for The Arab Weekly. My suspicion is that this is less a newspaper than an aggregator of material published elsewhere, much of it unreliable propaganda for extremist and fringe points of view. At least one writer, "Dr. Alan Ned Sabrosky Ph.D. - (Professor, National & World Politics, Salem-News.com Contributor) is known as a conspiracy theorist and a writer for the propaganda and conspiracy theory website Veterans Today. Also, I cannot find any SECONDARY coverage or this local newspaper. I have created quite a few articles on local U.S. newspapers, and have sourced others that turn up at AfD (cf. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jackson Herald). In my experience, it is just about always possible to source a local paper published in the U.S. Even newish ones , defunct ones, and small ethnic papers. The fact that I cannot find anything about this paper makes me seriously doubt its reliability as a source. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 17:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Is the following a reliable new article, or is it an opinion piece per News organizations?
The article is one of three sources used to support the statement, "There have been multiple photographs of Biden engaged in what commentators considered to be inappropriate proximity to women and children, including kissing and or touching" in Joe Biden#Allegations of inappropriate physical contact.
News organizations says, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact."
TFD ( talk) 14:47, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Exceptional claims require exceptional sources. This is not an exceptional claim. There are dozens of photographs and videos of Biden exhibiting the behavior in question. There are dozens of reliable sources reporting on that behavior (vox, time, slate, salon, npr, politico, usatoday, guardian, wapo, nyt, etc). But beyond that, your argument is nonsense anyway, since what is written in our article is an opinion considered to be inappropriate
, in which case opinion articles are entirely valid to show that pov. Markowicz is an example of one person who has that opinion, of which again, there are dozens, on both sides of the isle. If you want to swap out that source for a different source, backing the same content, I would have no objection, but pretending that this is somehow weakly sourced is just posing.
ResultingConstant (
talk) 16:32, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or authorResultingConstant ( talk) 21:15, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
I agree with The Four Deuces here – since there are two other reliable sources for the statement, I don't think there's a good reason for the op-ed to be used. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 20:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Independent, self-published articles of "former Boeing flight control engineer Peter Lemme" [1] [2]
The source has been sitting in
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2019/06#satcom.guru since 27 April 2019 (*.guru urls are blacklisted).
Edit: thank you for
Marc Lacoste and
Beetstra for white-listing it. 11:30, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
The Seattle Times says "The expert, Peter Lemme, a Kirkland-based former Boeing flight-controls engineer who is now an avionics and satellite-communications consultant, has no direct personal knowledge of the airplane’s development or certification but he did a detailed analysis of the October crash of a Lion Air 737 MAX. He was extensively cited as an expert in The Seattle Times, and subsequently in multiple press accounts, including in The New York Times." [3]
Articles: Boeing 737 MAX groundings, MCAS (737), Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, Lion Air Flight 610 Aron M🍁 (➕) 15:06, 14 May 2019
Hello guys. I'm looking for some pros and cons regarding the reliability of these aviation articles. Any opinions?
Aron M🍁
(➕) 05:39, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Qualifications and relevant jobs of Peter Lemme (thanks to
Greenbe for the linkedin research):
As Avionics Engineer he worked on a "Pitch Augmentation Control System (PACS) for 767 and 757" ... "testing failure scenarios of inputs and of outputs". [3]
Related discussion: [Talk:Boeing 737 MAX groundings] ( version on 21 May 2019) — Aron M🍂 (🛄📤) 18:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Tl;dr: Further research revealed Peter Lemme is more than qualified to write articles in the context of
Avionics (specifically
Aircraft flight control systems and
Communications). His articles are also endorsed by The Seattle Times and multiple press accounts, therefore qualify as reliable
primary sources. —
Aron M🍂
(🛄📤) 18:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
References
I wrote an article about a non-notable book ( My Autobiography (Miedzianik)) by a British poet ( David Miedzianik), which cited a blogpost by an American friend of his ( Jonathan Mitchell) who had flown to England to meet him, stating that the book was in the process of being adapted to the stage but the idea fell through. This is the source and the text supported by it:
According to American autism activist and author Jonathan Mitchell, in 1992, the book was in the process of being adapted to a play, however by 1993, the plans had fallen through due to the playwright being an "amateur". [1].
Is this acceptable? The article about the book was recently PRODded, but I'd like to incorporate the text into the article about the author. Heepman1997 ( talk) 20:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
References
No, its just another blog. Slatersteven ( talk) 08:17, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Not wholly sure what to do here this [ [12]] seems to be being used on a number of music articles, as is. Not a link to the specific album, just the search engine page. I am not sure this is acceptable. Slatersteven ( talk) 14:34, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
This edit has recently been made [ [13]], but I have some doubts as to the source https://www.dailysabah.com/. My concern is that the "in depth investigative reporting" seems to consists of talking to two local tradesmen. It just seems all a bit dodgy. Slatersteven ( talk) 15:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
" The misrepresentation has not yet been addressed by the BBC or by Dooley and casts a shadow over her entire reporting career."does not seem to be supported by Daily Sabah (I'm not sure the BBC actually pulled this, and I don't see Daily Sabah being a particularly good source for a BBC journo's career - nor do I quite see it there (they do have an allusion to Der Spiegel's Relotius - but they don't make a direct tie)). I would think this needs to be attributed as a claim of dailysabah - as at present we have BBC vs. Dailysabah (RS vs. (iffy) RS - BBC being stronger here). I'll note that Daily Sabah seems to be attributing this to Hurriyet ( probably this piece, in Turkish). I will also note there are serious press freedom issues in Turkey, particularly post failed-coup - see RSF, Freedom houst. In short - bits here misrepresent the Turkish source. The Turkish source should probably only be used attributed. What's lacking is any coverage by BBC or some British source covering them (e.g. the viewers). I'll also note, and this is WP:OR, but somewhat informed OR, that this isn't necessarily Dooley's "fault" (she seems to be more of a presenter/interviewer) - but rather more a production/preparation issue - so I'm not sure I'd pin it on her bio in any event. Icewhiz ( talk) 15:14, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Can PTC Punjabi be considered reliable when it comes to BLP of actors in Cinema of Punjab? Recently, an article from the website has been used to support the "birth_name" of a subject here. Apart from their own programs, concerts and awards I don't find it to be reliable in other areas. Kindly advice. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 16:55, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Rupinder Singh Grewal(see here), and according to Hindustan Times, his real name is
Rupinder Grewal(see here). In fact, according to The Times of India, he once mentioned that his real name is
Rupinder Singh Grewal– see here. So I guess
Rupinder Singh Grewalcan be added to his BLP without any issue. - NitinMlk ( talk) 20:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Copying our articles, eg a sentence from 2007 [14] ended up in it. [15] Needs removal from these: Self-published through Trafford and here's the author's bio. [16] Doug Weller talk 13:38, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Can Elite Daily be considered a reliable source and be used as a reference? The Wikipedia entry about the news website shows a rather shady history, so I have some serious reservations regarding its use. The site has used fake names and profile photos for its writers, which seemingly led to the identity theft of a writer from Gawker. Its articles have been written by "contributors", as opposed to its own staff or journalists, which signifies the lack of a vetting process or editorial oversight of its content. It reasonably raises my concern of it being a questionable source. But to what extent is this website reliable, and to what extent, if at all, can it be used? ℯ xplicit 11:00, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Is screenrant considered a reliable source? DCBVS ( talk) 02:44, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
At Talk:The Bible and homosexuality, SharabSalam ( talk · contribs) is arguing that these two books are primary sources and that referencing them therefore constitutes original research, while I am arguing that they are secondary sources and that referencing them is appropriate. Who is right?
The account of the friendship between David and Jonathan in the Books of Samuel has been interpreted by traditional and mainstream Christians as a relationship only of affectionate regard, but has been interpreted by some authors as of a sexual nature.[13][14]
13. Boswell, John. Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe. New York: Vintage, 1994. (pp. 135–137)
14. Halperin, David M. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality. New York: Routledge, 1999
– Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 00:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
This is exactly how I see that paragraph.-- SharabSalam ( talk) 00:19, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
This notice is an update to previous discussions, listed here, pinging their creators:
More than 10,000 biographies cite or link to a self-published site that does not meet Wikipedia's requirements for reliability. The editor is not a genealogist nor is he considered a reliable source. While he does cite some reliable sources, a significant amount of it is personal correspondence, email lists, etc. The site itself says it is full of errors; I have frequently found errors or info contradictory to reliable sources. This is not a slam on Darryl Lundy who works hard to compile this, but a reminder that Wikipedia has a stricter standard. We don't accept self-published for a reason.
The first discussion in 2011 resulted in the conclusion that these sites they should not be used for living people, however, I see the site frequently cited in non-BLP articles to list descendents and heirs who are living.
My Wikipedia history proves I work extensively on these biographies, and I can tell you this biographical data is available elsewhere. The births and deaths for royals, nobilities and landed gentry are recorded extensively, to this day, by reliable sites such as Burke's and Debretts (still publishing), not to mention obituaries, and birth and death records/notices. As was pointed out before, Wikipedia editors use this site because it's more convenient to them than accessing a reliable source, whether online or at a (gasp) library. Convenience does not equal reliability.
I'm really fed up with seeing this site used as a source and it's going to take me years at this point to fix the 10,000 articles. It's time for this site to be blacklisted, with a message similar to that of the Daily Mail blacklist, to alert editors to finding a reliable source instead. —Мандичка YO 😜 13:09, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I have posted a long reply to User:Wikimandia about Darryl Lundie's website at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#thepeerage.com. Lundy usually cites his sources and many of them are reliable so I think that it is OK to use his site providing it is in line citations in the WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT format to Wikipedia reliable sources. Please read my posting at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#thepeerage.com for more details. "While he does cite some reliable sources, a significant amount of it is personal correspondence, email lists, etc." this has not been my experiance I find that most of his entries for the periods I edit tends to cite
-- PBS ( talk) 20:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
User:Wikimandia,I think you summed it up well back in 2012:
OK, so if I'm starting to understand this correctly, when I come across an article that uses the website as a reference source, I should work with the authors to improve references (by going back to the original source if available) and agree to remove any dubious information that I don't believe is likely to have originated in a published work. In a small number of circumstances it may be relevant to include an external link. Wikiwayman (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
PBS ( talk) 20:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
" Why do you assume that editor just copied from Lundy?" It was the format of the two citations given at the creation of the article. Not only are they the same ones as Lundy cites (year and edition), but the format of the citations as laid out in the two articles is almost exactly the same (compare and contrast):
I have not stated that Lundy should be used because others are which is what I think you mean by "whataboutism". I have given detailed reasons why (because of WP:PRESERVE and Wikipedia is a work in progress) it is better to analyse citations to Lundy and in descending order:
The sites I have mentioned are not "whataboutism" they are examples of genealogical sites that do not cite any sources, and in my opinion are far more questionable than Lundy, or even {{ Medieval Lands by Charles Cawley}} which falls somewhere between the two. Cawley is an unreliable source, but one that cites lots of primary sources, but in places uses them to draw inferences which if copied into an article is a SYN as it is not made by a reliable secondary source (see also WP:PSTS). My point is that Lundy in the format of SAYWHEREYOUREADIT is an acceptable interim until an editor has time to replace the citation with a reliable one. The other sites are not.
Over the years I have been through thousands of the citations to all of the websites I have mentioned in this section adding "unreliable source" templates to them. In many cases they have not been altered since I did that. I suggest that Lundy is one of the better sites because he cites his sources, and as such the use of his site can be useful in judging whether text ought to be PRESERVED.
At the start of this section it was stated "While he does cite some reliable sources, a significant amount of it is personal correspondence, email lists, etc." the use of "some" and "significant" is a biased form of wording to promote one point of view (that the the site should be blacklisted). However as the information in Lundy is supported by citations, in some cases to Wikipidia reliable sources and sometime to Wikipedia unreliable sources, rather than banning Lundy, Lundy can be an interim step (see SAYWHEREYOUREADIT) until the reliable sources are either checked or new ones provided. With the limited exception of Cawley, it is not possible to use this interim step for the other websites I have mentioned in this section.
-- PBS ( talk) 16:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Should Dexerto be added to the sourcing edit filter to strongly discourage and deprecate its use as a source on Wikipedia as per a previous discussion [18]? X-Editor ( talk) 04:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
The website uncommongroundmedia.com was registered 92 days ago with anonymized records. The site is run by UGMediaLtd a company incorporated by Dan Fisher (not the journalist Daniel Fisher). The site appears to be a rehosting of the content of conatusnews.com which is no longer active. As articles hosted at uncommongroundmedia.com significantly predate the company or website (such as dating back to 2016), these were probably not written to be published at uncommongroundmedia, but either conatusnews or similar. The site makes no attempt to distinguish which (if any) publications were submitted to their site, to those that are recycled from elsewhere. Neither is there any explanation of why conatusnews was abandoned and has been replaced by this site which "legally" has no relationship to the old site.
The site's mission is "anti-left", as confirmed by their statement "Uncommon Ground is a platform for voices critical of political orthodoxy, for secularists, feminists and activists with positions deemed inconvenient or sidelined by the more dominant left-leaning media outlets." The site has no clear editorial standard, neither does it appear to comply with UK regulations for newspapers. There is no editorial board or peer review system, instead the choice of which articles get published is down to the management team which appears to be Dan Fisher and 3 others.
This source was raised for my attention by being inserted three times as a reliable source in Get the L Out by the article's creator. The article in question is http://uncommongroundmedia.com/lesbian-campaigners-target-stonewall. The article uses a photo and video from Facebook by someone who is not the writer. The author is Jo Bartosch, who over the last couple of years has written pro-TERF (and anti-Pride and anti-Stonewall) articles on Medium, Mumsnet, lesbianalliance, feministcurrent.com and so on, making it very easy to replace this source with one of the many alternatives by the same author which are pretty much consistent and interchangeable pro-TERF lobbying editorial pieces, however as the same sentence already has 2 other sources, even that would be unnecessary. -- Fæ ( talk) 11:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
pro-TERF" is irrelevant and violates WP:NPOV. Encyclopedias don't suppress sources because they are inconvenient for the desired narrative, or because its existence upsets some editors. That the author's works are also published in other outlets is inconsequential. Pyxis Solitary yak 02:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
pro-TERF" is Pyxis Solitary. What has been stated is that Jo Bartosch has written pro-TERF articles over several years, of which their contributions to the "anti-left" Uncommon Ground are identical and easily replaceable, from sites which are neither mass recycling entire texts from other websites without attribution, and have more credible processes for editorial review.
over the last couple of years has written pro-TERF (and anti-Pride and anti-Stonewall) articles"; which was what led you to claim that UC is an "alt-right" website when you deleted it from the article (see above linked edit summaries); and which is why you insist that UC is not a RS.
contributions to the "anti-left" Uncommon Ground are identical and easily replaceable" -- not if the exact same article has not been published elsewhere in a website that you can't accuse of being "alt-right". And when did 'the Left' become the Holy Grail of honesty and accuracy? Pyxis Solitary yak 10:28, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
http://uncommongroundmedia.com/about-us/ and http://uncommongroundmedia.com/authors/ create the impression that they publish submitted content, which is reviewed by their editors. The author, Jo Bartosch, has written 14 articles with them, but has no biographical information of her own. I wouldn't use it in this case, especially if there are better alternatives. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
At this CBD RfC, it was argued that:
FP is responsible for the development of Cannabis-based products at Entourage Phytolab. AC received monetary compensation for consulting work performed for Entourage Phytolab. LdS works at Bedrocan.)
and
I have a few questions:
- What are the ground rules regarding COI and MEDRS, and RS in general?
- Is there ever the case where a paper considered to have COI is included in the encyclopedia with a disclaimer of sorts, noting the COI?
- Are we expected to dig into each study included in a meta analysis for possible COI?
Thank you, petrarchan47 คุ ก 03:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks all for the responses. Where did all the editors go, by the way?
The last time I regularly edited in the MEDRS topic area was around 3.5 years ago, and much has changed. Quite frankly, what continues to emerge from my recent noticeboard queries, besides the profound lack of activity from (the dwindling pool of) editors, is the message that 'rules' regarding sourcing are all over the map; they've become, in practice, almost entirely subjective.
For instance, Alex's opinion about this journal is not supported by outside reliable sources. It is in fact contrary to what they say. Frontiers has been "whitelisted" by the authoritative body that oversees open access journals ( DOAJ); the "blacklist" site (Beall's) that erroneously included Frontiers was taken offline immediately after an investigation into their practices was completed, and the blacklist site (Cabell's) that is now considered the go-to source for predatory journals did 'not' see fit to include Frontiers. Frontiers has the stamp of approval from the regulatory bodies that formally decide which journals are not "junk", COPE and OASPA.
Yet we have a few editors who are placing their own opinion above these outside sources, and this is 'not' being challenged. Years ago this would have at least sparked a lively conversation, and ultimately would not be allowed to stand.
I don't feel as though I have any grasp of what MEDRS will be acceptable, when personal opinions can override the normal processes editors use to determine RS. Therefore I do not feel as if I can contribute to WP in certain topic areas. This is unfair and not how WP is supposed to work. petrarchan47 คุ ก 06:35, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh FSS, will you just stop beating that WP:DEADHORSE already? How many times must you be told that Frontiers does not qualify as a WP:MEDRES, doubly so when the authors of a specific paper have an obvious COI? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:31, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
For reputably-published papers, the assumption is that the publication process adequately deals with any COI so Wikipedia editors are not in a position to revisit it.R2 ( bleep) 01:05, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
“The open-access movement is really about anti-corporatism. OA advocates want to make collective everything and eliminate private business, except for small businesses owned by the disadvantaged. They don't like the idea of profit, even though many have a large portfolio of mutual funds in their retirement accounts that invest in for-profit companies.”Beall's erroneous views of OA were debunked by his direct supervisor just prior to his retirement (Swauger, 2017)." source
I've pinged Alexbrn and WAID, but for others who are interested in following this issue, please see my addition to DGG's talk page, and note that he requests that editors allow him to weigh in on new threads to his TP first. petrarchan47 คุ ก 21:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, My request could you please confirm osianama.com site can be used as reliable citations for adding a movie name on a Wikipedia Page Movie name: Pyar Ki Jeet (1962) https://www.osianama.com/film-titles/pyar-ki-jeet-1962?classification=FILM%20TITLE&cdt=Film%20Title
About the Osianama Archive & Library are two cultural fields - Indian & World Cinema AND Modern & Contemporary Asian Fine & Popular Arts & Crafts, which include thousands of very rare and significant artworks, antiquarian books, memorabilia and documents, systematically collected over decades so as to create a meaningful knowledge-base. Thanks in advance. Yashkkaryan ( talk) 18:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)Yash Aryan [1]
References
Hi, could you please update on the above matter. Thanks. Yashkkaryan ( talk) 18:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)Yash Aryan
Thank you so much, Sir Kailash Yashkkaryan ( talk) 20:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)Yash Aryan
The Library of Congress authority files often contain biographic information on the writer, such as birth date, birth place, and academic affiliation (e.g. this one). The information that the LOC records in an authority record comes from the resources they catalog, or from references sources that they access (and accordingly list in the "sources" section). All of it is either publicly available information, or provided by the author or his publisher.
Now oftentimes, for us as Wikipedians, this is the most easily accessible source for a person's birthdate and birthplace. But there seems to be disagreement on whether this information should be equated with court records and trial transcripts and thus is violating WP:BLPPRIMARY and, by extension, WP:NOR. I would like to settle this issue here, with feedback from the community. This issue extends beyond just the LOC authority files, to any library catalog, or any biographic database that merely "reprints" a person's information without the (apparently necessary) reflection that makes for a secondary source, such as NFL.com for American football players. -- bender235 ( talk) 17:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I want to raise a side issue here about full date of birth. I think many editors think we should routinely include the full date of birth, but WP:DOB says "With identity theft a serious ongoing concern, people increasingly regard their full names and dates of birth as private. Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public. If a subject complains about our inclusion of their date of birth, or the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year, provided that there is a reliable source for it." Doug Weller talk 20:24, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Over at the newly created Jew with a coin, @ Volunteer Marek: (VM) has been removing large chunks of content based on - diff:
"It's a COATRACK for the whole disgusting and racist "Poles are anti-semities" POV into this article."[31]
"common throughout Poland."was challenged on the grounds of: "nonesense" and
"The figurines do exist but they are not common". [32] Just about every source in the article notes these figurines are common or popular. Here is a non-exhastive list:
"This artifact could be considered an ethnographic banality, were it not for the unique scale of the phenomenon24",
" ‘Jew with a coin’ outdoes any other positive mascots".
"exploded in popularity with the rise of the post-socialist tourist trade". Lehrer has also spoken - here and here (and in multiple other places).
"The shops are full of dubious tchotchkes, rows of carved wooden figures of stereotypical Jews. Very popular are zydki, bearded little "lucky" Jews carrying a bag of loot, counting money, or just holding a coin. I read there's a tradition of turning your lucky Jew over on the Sabbath so their money falls out. Some take them along to football games for luck. If your team doesn't win it's the Jew's fault."
"They are so popular that they make common wedding and housewarming gifts."- JTA /TOI 2018
" they became particularly popular after the fall of Communism",
"Dr Shimon Samuels, Director for International Relations at the Simon Wiesenthal Centre: ... "They are sold in huge numbers outside football matches""
"This stereotypical depiction is thus controversial, although it seems quite innocent next to the common and widespread phenomenon of the Zydki – the figures of a Jew holding a coin, thought to be a talisman that brings good fortune and wealth, which has overtaken nearly all other such depictions."- Haaretz 2014.
"I discovered that “lucky Jew statues” ... — are all the rage",
"The statues are commonly given as gifts on special occasions, such as to mark a new job or moving to a new house".
" Many such pieces have been produced in Poland in recent decades.".
"one display case is filled with “lucky Jews” — little clay figurines of Orthodox Jews clutching a shiny coin, which are popular across Poland.".
"Zydkis all over".
"Wooden and clay statuettes, known to Poles as “Zydki,” little Jews, populate homes and shops across the country, and far outnumber the remnants of a once populous Jewish community."
Outside input appreciated - are leading scholars in the field and WP:NEWSORGs such as New York Times and Haaretz reliable? Icewhiz ( talk) 07:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
"Comparative literature is an academic field dealing with the study of literature and cultural expression across linguistic, national, and disciplinary boundaries.".
"The interdisciplinary nature of the field means that comparatists typically exhibit acquaintance with sociology, history, anthropology, translation studies, critical theory, cultural studies, and religious studies. As a result, comparative literature programs within universities may be designed by scholars drawn from several such departments". Per Brown's department -
"The department performs a role similar to that of the study of international relations, but works with languages and artistic traditions, so as to understand cultures “from the inside.”. Icewhiz ( talk) 10:10, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Boys, girls, and everyone in between: let's not play dumb, okay? It's a Jew with a coin. You don't have to be a genius to see the antisemitic connection. If there was any plausible and benign explanation to this imagery it would've been present in literature, film, poetry, daily lingo, wholesale packages and collectible cards. Whatever Keff is or isn't an expert on, she and all of the other dozen sources say the same, as will any sane person who hasn't been living in a cave for the last 2,000 years. This isn't some tiny nuance we're talking about, but the oldest antisemitic stereotype in existence, and anyone editing in these fields should be able to recognize it in an instant. The same goes for antisemitism in Poland - we don't need to be XTRA BLP CAREFUL in stating it exists - it's kind of well known and not exactly recent. As long as we don't make sweeping generalization or OR, this is about as straightforward as it can be. François Robere ( talk) 23:53, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
"Żyd z pieniążkiem jest patronem finansowego powodzenia. „Żyd w sieni, pieniądz w kieszeni” – głosi hasło. Kiedy go widzę w domach, sklepach, w galeriach z artystycznymi przedmiotami – czuję się źle"-
"A Jew with a coin is the patron of financial success. "A Jew in the hall, money in his pocket," says the slogan. When I see it in homes, shops, galleries with artistic objects - I feel bad"clearly stating the subject of the article. The article then treats Polish stereotyping of Jews, before turning back to Jew with a coin in the last section, where it says:
"W Polsce najczęściej antysemityzm nie jest rozpoznawany jako antysemityzm, czyli jako własny, wrogi wobec pewnej grupy mit czy zestaw stereotypów. Jednocześnie treści tego mitu są ogromnie popularne i nadal bierze się je za fakty. I tak trwa powielanie mitów oraz stereotypów, aż do poczucia oczywistości, czyli w sumie do braku refleksji, do otępienia. Jedyną skuteczną odpowiedzią na to byłaby edukacja, ale jej nie ma. Za to powielanie stereotypu zachodzi w wielu miejscach, głównie w Kościele. Jedynie z tych powodów wizerunek Żyda z pieniążkiem może w Polsce uchodzić za neutralny. Ale naprawdę jest on wpisany w długi szereg antysemickich wizerunków: jest w nich Żyd kuzyn świni (Judensau), Żyd diabeł, Żyd czarownik, Żydzi wytaczający krew z dziecka, Żyd gruby kapitalista z cygarem, Żyd chudy bolszewik z nożem, Żyd Trocki ...- (google translate) -
"In Poland, the most common anti-Semitism is not recognized as anti-Semitism, ie as its own, hostile to a certain group of myths or a set of stereotypes. At the same time, the contents of this myth are extremely popular and are still taken as facts. And so it continues to duplicate myths and stereotypes, to the feeling of obviousness, that is, to the lack of reflection, to dullness. The only effective answer to this would be education, but it is not. For this, stereotyping takes place in many places, mainly in the Church. It is only for these reasons that the image of a Jew with a coin may be regarded as neutral in Poland. But he is really inscribed in a long series of anti-Semitic images: a Jew, a cousin of a pig (Judensau), a Jew, a devil, a Jewish sorcerer, Jews baptizing blood from a child, a Jew a fat capitalist with a cigar, a Jew a skinny Bolshevik with a knife, a Jew named Trotsky ...". She's rather clear about it. I suppose objecting to what is written black on white in Polish shares a common thread with opposing multiple, clearly reliable, English language sources that state other facts. Icewhiz ( talk) 05:05, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
One more source: According to a 2018 survey conducted at the Center for Prejudice Research at the University of Warsaw, [1] the following percentages of Poles either "agree" or "definitely agree" that:
Marek, you're fighting for the wrong causes. François Robere ( talk) 12:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
References
I wonder if anyone who has not previously edited some aspect of the Jews and Poland question would care to comment? Slatersteven ( talk) 13:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Une enquête réalisée en mai-juin 2015 par Paweł Dobrosielski, Piotr Majewski et Justyna Nowak confirme l’importance de la diffusion de l’image du « Juif à la pièce d’argent » : 65 % des enquêtés l’identifient, 55 % l’ayant vu chez des amis ou dans la famille, 26 % dans le commerce tandis que 18 % en possèdent une chez soi5. L’âge semble sans incidence sur ce niveau de reconnaissance, ce qui tend à confirmer que cette pratique est récente, toutes les générations y ayant été introduites en même temps. Cette image n’est pas que répandue : un enquêté sur deux l’associe à la superstition selon laquelle elle apporte la fortune. Mais son usage à proprement parler ne suit pas automatiquement. D’après Paweł Dobrosielski, « seuls » 24 % des enquêtés savent qu’il faut placer un grosz derrière le cadre et 13 % qu’il faut le retourner le jour du shabbat6-(google translate) -
"A survey conducted in May-June 2015 by Paweł Dobrosielski, Piotr Majewski and Justyna Nowak confirms the importance of spreading the image of the "Jew to the silver coin": 65% of respondents identify it, 55% l having seen friends or family, 26% in commerce while 18% have one at home5. Age does not seem to affect this level of recognition, which tends to confirm that this practice is recent, as all generations were introduced at the same time. This image is not only widespread: one respondent in two associates it with the superstition according to which it brings fortune. But its use strictly speaking does not follow automatically. According to Paweł Dobrosielski, "only" 24% of respondents know that you have to put a grosz behind the frame and 13% that you have to return it on the Sabbath6. So - 18% at their home. Common and widespread. Icewhiz ( talk) 13:55, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
For the past few weeks the page Polish Jews has seen back and forth reverts over the inclusion of this source ( bibliographical entry). It's a book collecting essays by a number of historians (mostly Polish) or Polish expats, ex. Chodakiewicz himself, Piotr Gontarczyk, Peter Stachura, John Radzilowski, Waldemar Chrostowski) on Polish Jewish history. It has been challenged mostly by User:Icewhiz who pointed out (and who'll likely elaborate on his criticism shortly) that: 1) one of the two co-editors for this, Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, has been described by some sources as right-wing activist (my counter: he is nonetheless a professor at some American institutions, his works are cited and reviewed in international academia). The other co-editor for this is relatively uncontroversial Polish scholar Wojciech Muszyński 2) the book seems to have received two relatively negative academic reviews (seen in the paragraph describing this book at MJC bio page; another review [34] has been claimed to be negative as well, but I don't have a copy of it and Icewhiz did not reply to my request to share his copy of it that was posted on the Talk:Polish Jews; I'll also note that this particular review by Krzywiec might be in turn criticized in the letter to the editor published here). The only positive review I've found is non-acdemic in Polish-langage popular history Histmag web magazine/portal. My reply to the relatively negative reviews found is that while the book has been described as having an agenda (likely, right wing and Polish nationalistic), it is nonetheless cited and engaged with by other scholars as part of an academic discourse, and the reviews, while pointing out that bias, are themselves also likely biased, and the do not suggest that this is some Holocaust denial revisionist crap - just a biased, but not unreliable, collection of essays. 3) Finally, Icewhiz has pointed that the book is published by Leopold Press, a small printing press associated with the Institute of World Politics, and that Leopold Press is run by Chodakiewicz, thus raising an issue of potential self-publishing. My reply to this is that it's a minor, but still, academic press, and that while there is some minor COI here, we have no proof that peer review or such were not done. (Polish edition of the book was released by a minor publishing house the facto that I can't find much about, so it's not a great sign, I'll admit). Overall, however, my view is that the book is not self-published (a number of reverts just argued 'removing SPS' and such) and that it can be cited, as long as the author of a particular essay is clearly attributed for any statement that may be seen as controversial or extraordinary. Further comments appreciated. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:56, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
"The holder of the Kościuszko Chair at IWP, Dr. Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, is the Publisher of Leopolis Press.". A search in worldcat brings up approx. 5 books "published" under this label - a significant chunk of them with Chodakiewicz listed as an author.
"In the Polish People's Republic, under Soviet occupation, my family taught me not to be afraid, I will not be afraid in the USA. For now, they do not put in jail, like my father, even for Solidarity, or grandparents for AK and PSL. I have neo-Stalinists and other leftists and, in general, the forces of evil in the nose in every latitude".
"Chodakiewicz is a frequent contributor to several Polish publications, such as the weekly Najwyzszy Czas! (The Time is Now!). That's the magazine of the Real Politics Union party, a fringe, pro-life, anti-gay marriage, pro-property rights, anti-income tax group. It often uses anti-Semitic stereotypes on its pages, according to a Tel Aviv University global "Anti-Semitism Survey." It was in this magazine, in November 2007, that he wrote critically about gays. "If everything is equal, if there is no difference, for example, between Christianity and cannibalism, then — according to the argument of those who have an interest in it — homosexuals should be treated as a norm, so they should have equal rights. In reality it is not about equal rights, but about special privileges. The biological norm is about prolonging the species. A deviation from the norm can not be a norm.". [3] Najwyzszy Czas! is noted by others to have published convicted Holocaust denier Dariusz Ratajczak frequently. [5] He has written that Obama was
"Muslim, a radical, and a friend and protégé of communists", [3] Speaking at a far-right rally in Poland, he said: "We want a Catholic Poland, not a Bolshevik one, not multicultural or gay!" [2] Per the SPLC he has also written on the White genocide conspiracy theory. [3]
"there are conspiracies everywhere in this book, but the author offers no names, no institutions, no objectives, and no strategies". [6] His views on Jews -
"Chodakiewicz's work represents the most extreme spectrum in what is considered the contemporary mainstream ethno-nationalist school of history writing[7],
"Chodakiewicz is perhaps the first historian in the postcommunist period who consistently casts Polish-Jewish relations in terms of conflict and uses conflication as an explanation and justfication of anti-Jewish violence in modern Poland"[8]
"It seems that it is not a coincidence that [Barbara] Gorczycka-Muszyńska has the same surname as another author and editor of the collection"(and I was unable, as Krzywiec was unable, to find any publications from her in an academic context), another author - Tania C. Mastrapa - runs
"Mastrapa Consultants – a company, which according to her short biography, restitutes property on Cuba"and authored a chapter comparing Cuban property to the situation post-war Poland (the author of the journal article deemed fit to sarcastically quote this from the book -
"The situation in Cuba is in a way similar to the situation of humiliated wives in the past. It often happened that the husband, who constrained his wife, did not let her study, work outside home or drive a car. Her role was to work, obviously for free, for the sake of the family. She was not allowed to participate in making budget decisions or any other decisions for the money belonged to the husband. Such a woman lived devoid of respect and dignity. In turn the husband wanted her ..... Similarly to that endangered husband who wants to criticize his wife and does not want to give her personal freedom, the Castro regime does not want its property (i.e. the Cubans) to be free […]. When the Cubans recover their freedom they will become lawful owners of real estate and moveable property[1] (read academic much?! Should we place this in, say, Cuba?).
"Mainly because he does not want (yes, it's a man) to meet my fate. Mark Paul has a dependent family, home and professional life". [37] How many academic works publish anonymous authors? No sane academic publisher would carry this. It bears mentioning we discussed Paul previously on RSN: RSN 241 and in this RfC (published also on RSN) decided to exclude Paul based on reliability concerns.
References
"There is something farcical about the conception of a crusade against the modern world professed by a few researchers from a marginal research centre,10 which is a recruitment pool of the CIA.11 But could this McCarthyism drenched in the East European “sauce” with the whole peculiar, local color; this “information depositary,” as Chodakiewicz and Muszyński state in the introduction, worthy of 1930s right-wing political leaflets and then slightly filtered through the 2011 Poland political correctness, survive anywhere else abroad?"
"This collection is more like the material for a seminar of linguists or even scholars of rhetoric and propaganda. The book will not be good nourishment for readers interested in the Holocaust and its third phase, i.e. the basic topics of the essays by Jan Tomasz Gross and Irena Grudzińska-Gross.. I'll also note that, as the review states, the book is very light on facts or research of any kind - it is for the most part polemic essays from a moral standpoint, and not historical writing. One of the authors is a priest (himself a topic of study in this field, the chapter is titled "Moral Dilemmas in Turbulent Times" - described as a
"pseudo-theological lecture"). We generally presume sources are unreliable unless proven otherwise - red flags around this self-published work abound. Icewhiz ( talk) 08:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
"the Institute of World Politics, a boutique graduate school for wannabe spies and national security nerds in Washington, D.C.". [39]. Icewhiz ( talk) 19:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
"This book has more errors in basic English than any other scholarly book I have read ... The Brute Polak stereotype communicates that Poles are inept, uneducated, chauvinists. The many errors in this text could be used, in the wrong hands, to support that stereotype.
"As readers will suspect, these errors are reflective of larger problems. Most grievously, ‘Golden Harvest or Hearts of Gold?’ accuses several prominent Polish-studies scholars of Stalinism"...
"Squandering Polonia's energies in fruitless witch-hunts, using paranoia to turn one Polish-American on another, prevents Polonia from uniting and responding strategically to the Brute Polak stereotype."
"Golden Harvest or Hearts of Gold? repeatedly identifies Princeton professor Jan Tomasz Gross as the source of the Brute Polak stereotype. This is factually incorrect, and it disserves Polonia. Gross' oeuvre includes a previous work, Revolution from Abroad, that educates the reader about the little-known Soviet occupation of Poland. Too, the Brute Polak stereotype existed before Jan Tomasz Gross was born"...
"Golden Harvest or Hearts of Gold? implies that Jews and leftists are responsible for the Brute Polak stereotype ..... Nothing could be further from the truth. Almost one hundred years ago, Madison Grant and Kenneth L. Roberts were just two of many anti-Communist and arch-Nordic Americans who disseminated immensely influential depictions of Brute Polaks.
"Only two of the fourteen authors are PhDs currently employed at universities. The selections do not follow the paradigm of scholarly articles: they do not advance a single thesis and then attempt to prove that thesis through original, peer-reviewed research. Rather, the articles ramble; they are replete with rhetorical questions. Necessary citations are absent. The index is woefully inadequate. The authors comment on stereotypes in popular American culture, yet none are scholars of stereotypes or of American culture, and none cite previous research on stereotypes of Poles in America.".
"The book works very hard to produce the impression that Poles have ‘hearts of Gold’ and that they weren't all that antisemitic before World War Two broke out, and that during the war Poles, for the most part, helped Jews. Perhaps the nadir of this aspect of the book is when the 1946 Kielce Pogrom is referred to using scare quotes that suggest either that the pogrom never happened, or that it was not really a pogrom (320). Ethical Poles have acknowledged since 1946 that the Kielce Pogrom happened, that it was carried out by Poles, and that patriotic Poles will resist the kind of anti-Semitism that produced it."
Oh ffs. WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT is not a sufficient reason to declare a source not-RS. A source may be biased and still be reliable. If there are concerns about bias, then we just make sure to attribute. This is an academic source and easily qualifies for reliability. This is, like, RS101. The notion that it's not reliable is ridiculous and reflection of Icewhiz's WP:TENDENTIOUS approach to editing in this area, nothing more. Volunteer Marek ( talk) 15:04, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm going to repeat myself... "I'm failing to see WHAT this source is attempting to be used for - the exact information. I tried looking on the talk page but it was the usual mess of accusations/edit warring/long posts with little actual content relating to the article. Please, someone post the exact information that this source is being proposed to be used for." ... would the various parties stop discussing each other and answer the question... briefly and succiently. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
The Polish government enacted legislation on "abandoned property", placing severe limitations on inheritance not present in pre-war inheritance law which allowed inheritance by second-degree relatives, limiting restitution to the original owners or direct heirs. The unprecedented rate of extermination of Polish Jews in conjunction with the fact that only Jewish property was officially confiscated by the Nazis suggests "abandoned property" was equivalent to "Jewish property". [1] Polish officials did not conceal this, the formulators of the law argued that it was necessary to prevent wealth concentration in the hands of "unproductive and parasite factors". [1] The initial 1945 decrees were superseded by a 1946 law, [2] with a claims deadline of 31 December 1947 (later extended to 31 December 1948) after which property devolved to the Polish state. [3] Even if Jews regained de-jure control, when it was occupied by Poles additional lengthy proceedings were required. [4] The majority of Jewish claimants could not afford the restitution process without financial help due to the filing costs, legal fees, and inheritance tax. [5] Many surviving Polish Jews in the USSR were repatriated only after the end of the claims deadline in 1948, and Polish officials blocked return of Jews from DP camps. [3] While it is hard to estimate how many Jews got property back, the number was extremely small. [6]
References
with various other content - some of which is sourced to Polish language microhistories (those I've attempted to verify - e.g. Talk:History of the Jews in Poland#Krzyżanowski and Talk:History of the Jews in Poland#Skibińska actually have opposite conclusions) and some of which is sourced to Hearts of gold (which I did not attempt to verify - as this non-academic text self-published by a SPLC designated individual is not remotely reliable) - the bits sourced from Heats of gold read:
Successive restitution laws on “abandoned property” of March 2, 1945, May 6, 1945 and March 8, 1946, which remained in effect until the end of 1948, allowed property owners who had been dispossessed during the war or, if deceased, their relatives, whether residing in Poland or outside the country, to reclaim privately owned property that was not subject to nationalization by way of a simplified, expedited and far less expensive procedure than the regular civil procedures. [1] Until remaining abandoned properties became nationalized at the end of 1955, such persons, as well as more distant relatives, could claim property of deceased owners under the regular civil procedures. [2] [3]
Although municipal court rulings did not confer immediate ownership on someone who was not a dispossessed owner, successful claimants were able to sell the properties immediately following revendication. [4]
References
"The holder of the Kościuszko Chair at IWP, Dr. Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, is the Publisher of Leopolis Press.". The judge, AFAICT, never published anything else in an academic context (Also noted by the journal article (on Golden Hearts) that says she has the same surname as an editor of this piece). Icewhiz ( talk) 04:53, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
"a thoroughly discredited and corrupt organization"- it is generally a well-respected organization for far-right figures in the North America - we've had multiple discussions on the subject. One should note that Teresa Prekerowa died in 1998 - some 13 years prior to this book published by Chodakiewicz - the appearance of a reprint of her much earlier work - is not a postmortem endorsement of Chodakiewicz's book by Prekerowa. Icewhiz ( talk) 16:46, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Tatzref (and others), much of your wall of text is unreadable or deals with other editors, which is not the point of this board. Please re-read the edit notice you get when you edit this board ... the one that says "Before posting, please be sure to include any of the following information that is available:" This board is set up to discuss issues of reliablity for specific information - not to discuss editor conduct. You'll find that you get much better results if you stick to a brief presentation without mentioning other editors. If the wall of text has indeed just been copied from somewhere else, that's not helpful at all. Want to know why no other editors besides myself have weighed in? It's the endless walls of text and constant bickering between editors on all sides. Until that stops, few uninvolved editors will be willing to deal with the situation. If the opinons of this board are really wanted, everyone involved should seriously try to change their behavior. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
There is a dispute on the article Lee J. Carter over use of the term "red-baiting". Here is the text in question, from [49]:
Carter has been red-baited by Republicans as well as centrist Democrats for his democratic socialist ideology,
sourced to [50], [51], [52], [53] [54], [55], [56]. Three of these sources use the term "red-baiting": a tweet from reporter Graham Moomaw, an article from Slate quotes a tweet where Annie Shields, an editor at The Nation, uses the term, and an interview with Jacobin. The Jacobin article and the tweet in Slate refer specifically to his republican election opponent, while only the Graham Moomaw tweet says democrats are doing it as well. Do these sources support use of the term "red-baiting"? Do they support the part that says that centrist Democrats did it too? Red Rock Canyon ( talk) 00:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment: Please note that IP is forum shopping as they originally claimed this was a BLP violation and posted about it on ANI two days ago and was told it is no violation. They are now posting here to try to get their personal preference reflected in the article. IP has been combative, insulting, and outright lying, to say nothing of openly flouting several rules such as edit-warring in lieu of finding consensus on the talk page per BRD (and as requested numerous times over the past three weeks). They are an SPA (though they only just now started editing "random page" articles perfunctorily to remove that allegation) and I strongly suspect that they have a COI with regards to the other delegate mentioned in the Carter article, Mark Keam, which they have not yet denied on the talk page. JesseRafe ( talk) 12:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Is there an accepted term for the equivalent of “red-baiting” - but aimed at those on the other end of the political spectrum? (ie, where the target is accused of being a fascist or similar, etc.) Blueboar ( talk) 17:45, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I have an anon arguing that https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/lacey-sturm.html is a reliable source for Lacey Sturm's birth date. I argued that does not appear to be a reliable source. There is no list of staff, no list of editorial policy, there is no source for the information that is provided (author), no way to submit corrections, and if there was, how that would be vetted. Can this source be used for this birth date? Can the site be used for any birth date? Can it be used for any details about a BLP? Walter Görlitz ( talk) 20:49, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I've been removing it on sight for a few years now, after a RSN discussion at that time. From what I've seen, the information they use appears to come from publicists or scraping. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:38, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Consider using something self-published (by her), if it exists. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 09:05, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello all. Here is the question: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Teahouse#Identifying_reliable_sources Does anyone have an answer? Puduḫepa ( talk) 11:19, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
I added a section on the cursing of Ali to this page Muhammad bin Qasim and it was removed all together. Following is the reference and the passage:-
References:-
[1] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib", Volume 7, page 226, serial no. 413.
[2] Derryl N. MacLean, "Religion and Society in Arab Sind", page 126, E. J. Brill (1989).
"Al-Hajjāj, wrote to Muhammad bin Qasim Thaqafi to summon Atiyya and ask him to curse Ali ibn Abi Talib and, in the event of his refusal to do so, to slash him four hundred times and to shave his head and beard. Muhammad summoned Atiyya and read over al-Hajjāj's letter to him so that he might choose one of the two alternatives. Atiyya declined to curse Ali and agreed to the alternative".
The first book that I referred to is one of the key source books in Hadith science. Scholars consult it when they discuss authenticity of a Hadith. The second one is a secondary source, published in 1989.
Cursing of Ali is a well established Umayyad tradition and it is a sign of discrimination against Shia muslims, which was quite common in Umayyad times. This historical fact is very important to be mentioned in the article, with reference.
Hereby a link to Tahdhib al Tahdhib at wikisource:-
And the wikipedia page of this author Ibn Hajar:- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Hajar_al-%E2%80%98Asqalani
Dr. Hamza Ebrahim ( talk) 22:43, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Neither journal appears at WP:SOURCEWATCH or WP:RSP. Both exclusively publish racist pseudo-science that wouldn't fly anywhere else, and the majority of their articles are written by members of their own respective editorial boards: 6 of the 9 articles in the most recent TOQ are written by members of their staff, and Richard Lynn somehow managed to co-author 7 out of the 12 articles in this issue of Mankind Quarterly while simultaneously serving as the editor-in-chief. This makes it unlikely that they are subject to anything resembling actual peer review.
I only found brief mentions of The Occidental Quarterly in the WP:RSN archives. Here are the previous discussions of Mankind Quarterly:
At a minimum it seems like these would be worth including at WP:SOURCEWATCH. Nblund talk 20:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Mankind Quarterly gets include in
WP:SOURCEWATCH through
(currently entry 13). The Occidental Quarterly doesn't get picked up, because there are no categorization that marks it as unreliable. We could easily have a blanket "questionable" categorization on the alt-right movement, if that's desired, or it could categorized in something like Category:Pseudo-scholarship/ Category:Scientific racism/ Category:Conspiracist media or whatever else is appropriate and get flagged as problematic for those reasons.
Both could have a specific entry, but I didn't seek individual crap publications save for those that had an entry at WP:RSP (to document consensus), or those I stumbled upon accompanied by a reliable source calling them crap. If you have reputable sources calling them crap/nonsense, just post links here and I'll add them. Unless you want an RSP listing or whatever. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 03:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Is This a valid source
https://www.troikatalent.com/antonia-clarke
Page intented to be Used on: Antonia Clarke 6equj5 2444 ( talk) 15:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)6equj5 2444
I would like to request for comment for a source for Just Jared, which is reliable, unreliable, nor depreciated. Because this website Just Jared is listed as spam on the Wikipedia blacklist. -- 119.94.169.139 ( talk) 14:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
"Celebrity Gossip"site, and Wikipedia generally avoids gossip. Most of the content on Just Jared references other websites, and you can cite these other websites if they are reliable. — Newslinger talk 20:41, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Is imdb a reliable source for sections such as filmography and career when there are no other substitutes(which are reliable) page intended to be used on Antonia Clarke 6equj5 2444 ( talk) 19:50, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
No, whilst some of it may be primary a lot of it is user generated. Slatersteven ( talk) 09:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it OK to use The New Iranian Leadership book [1] for following material in People's Mujahedin of Iran article? Thanks, Saff V. ( talk) 11:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
In May 2005, Iran's
Ministry of Intelligence ran a disinformation operation against the MEK by deceiving
Human Rights Watch into "publishing a report detailing alleged human rights abuses committed by MEK leadership against dissident members. The report was allegedly based upon information provided to HRW by known Iranian MOIS agents who were former MEK members working for the Iranian Intelligence service."
References
Is The Next Web ( RSP entry) article "Online assessment and training platform ProProfs passes 1 million registered content-makers" a reliable source for ProProfs? Specifically, does this article help establish the company's notability?
Previous discussions of The Next Web:
Personally, I think this article is extremely promotional, and looks like a lightly retouched press release without any additional research from the author. I would not count this article toward the company's notability. — Newslinger talk 06:16, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Yet, the source is reliable indeed and had been acquired by the Financial Times as David Gerard said. RossK 16:02, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
"routine coverage"piece tied to a company metric ( registered users). — Newslinger talk 21:08, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Well, according to their focus they describe new technologies and many of their articles have the same format and dry style of featuring new companies. I don't say it is the best source but "The Next Web" is well known in technological world and is reliable. The Financial Times would buy yellow press from the street. I just want to accentuate that this is normal style for many technological magazines nowadays for specific business niche. Ross kramerov
Is this a blog or something? -- valereee ( talk) 13:10, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
The reliability of Human Events has been discussed before [59] [60], but this was before the publication shut down in February 2013 and the Human Events website has now re-launched with a new editor-in-chief, Raheem Kassam. Because of this, I think the reliability of Human Events in general should be revisited. X-Editor ( talk) 16:15, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
On 14 August 2017, Kassam published his book No Go Zones: How Sharia Law Is Coming to a Neighborhood Near You— the entire bullshit concept of "no-go zones" has long been debunked, and if that's the standard of journalism expected from him... nope. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 16:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Is Behind the Name considered a reliable source? The about page [61] lists its own sources, but it's not clear on any particular name page which sources were used. Asked because Planets in astrology uses it as a source for the meaning of Venus.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zojomars ( talk • contribs) 12:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Is Logically Fallacious ( logicallyfallacious.com), a book and website by Bo Bennett, a reliable source? The domain is cited in multiple articles about fallacies. The book was self-published by Bennett through eBookIt.com. The website was quoted in Fortune's "Food industry, its critics are cynical by 'nature'", but I don't think Bennett is an established subject-matter expert. — Newslinger talk 21:26, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, our old friend Medical Hypotheses, which comes up at RSN periodically [62] [63] [64] [65] and is consistently found to be not an RS, let alone in any way a MEDRS. Some of us go through and look for abuses of it as a medical source periodically (cc JzG).
It turns out that there's lots of links to it via its DOIs - I'm finding a lot by searching on "j.mehy" or just "mehy". Uses of it to support medical claims should almost certainly be removed. I'm just going through a pile now.
Should it be listed in perennial sources, as one to avoid? The only uses I can think of which would be justified would be in something like a biography concerning an author, e.g. it's very relevant to Peter Duesberg - David Gerard ( talk) 17:47, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Is this Dutch newspaper a reliable source? I understand it is published in tabloid format, but I also read that most Dutch newspapers switched to that format."On 30 March 2003. Het Parool became the first newspaper in the Netherlands to switch from broadsheet to tabloid format, a move which since has been followed by all other major and local newspapers in the country."
On Desmond is Amazing I’d like to use the following,
El Periódico de Catalunya, and The Feed, states he is the most famous "drag kid" in the world, [1] [2] Los Replicantes states he is the youngest professional drag queen in the world. [3]
Is this appropriate? Gleeanon409 ( talk) 20:56, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
I found another one but I’m not sure how these statements could be integrated. 1. “Being one of the youngest drag stars of all time (which has led him to the runway for The Blonds and Gypsy Sport, as well as campaigns for brands like SPKTRM Beauty and Converse), you can’t help but acknowledge the fact that you are far from the usual.” And 2.”He’s built a reputation for not only being one of the youngest drag queens in the world, but for being one of the most woke.” [4] Gleeanon409 ( talk) 15:19, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Here’s that full paragraph, “He’s built a reputation for not only being one of the youngest drag queens in the world, but for being one of the most woke. While other 11 year olds are stressed over their summer reading lists, Desmond is writing a book — no, not an overplayed, obligatory celeb “tell all” memoir, but an in-depth historical collection of the LGBTQ+ community, and his perspective on the future of the community. As other kids get excited for summer vacation, Desmond is preparing for a lengthy PRIDE month ahead: on top of creating the first-ever youth drag house, House of Amazing, he’s acting as Grand Marshall to Brooklyn PRIDE, and has a few “under wraps” projects coming out, all while trying to finish his school year.” From woke, it’s a political term of African American origin that refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. Gleeanon409 ( talk) 16:20, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
References
From Google translator [66] “Desmond is Amazing, the world's most famous drag kid (Title of article) With only 11 years, this small model and LGTBI activist from Manhattan wants to inspire other young people to be "incredible" like him” “At 11 years old he is a well-known LGBT activist and one of the most famous drag queens.”
Okay, in case the translation was an issue, I’ve included the translation link, relevant title of article and quotes. Is this source acceptable? Gleeanon409 ( talk) 21:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
i have been watching out this online News Portal from Nepal called Kathmandu Tribune article from this portal is cited on many Wikipedia pages, so i want to know news on it is considered as Reliable or not [67] Shringhringshring ( talk) 20:08, 2 June 2019 (UTC)