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 25 | ← | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | → | Archive 35 |
Hello! I have a question on using The Daily Kos as a source for Wikipedia edits. The relevant articles are Remote Area Medical, Nursing, and UVA SON. I am the editor who added those sources; I'm trying to get an impartial ear here, so I created another account to get some advice from those currently uninvolved with the brou-ha-ha over there. Anywhoo, I tried to include sources to The Myth of a Recession-Proof Job: Nursing, as well as The Busiest Emergency Room in America. Now, I understand the general principle of blogs being potentially unreliable sources- except that on both of those articles, there is extensive research chronicled well, and well-cited in both of them. I went through the links to verify the information was correct, and I even took an extra step on the "ER" room article, and contacted the head of the Remote Area Medical clinic to verify that article properly represented that clinic in Wise, VA.
Now, I believe part of the problem these people had with these sources was that they assumed I was the author, which is incorrect, and I can happily substantiate via IRL sources, as well as my communication with RAM's founder. If that was the case, obviously it would provide a COI, even though personal promotion would be hard to accomplish if the author is anonymous. I also found out via searching the DailyKos site that those articles were both reviewed by administrators there to verify it's content/veracity, which I can provide evidence of (or anyone familiar with DailyKos can verify personally via their account there). Indeed, I discovered he plans on hosting the "ER" article on his website, via the author's permission, to help chronicle the event.
Now, I think those are both important articles containing relevant information to the events, and, as such, would constitute a reliable source. Sources on blogs are no more relevant than citing Wikipedia in scholarly work. I understand the reluctance to rely solely on either a blog, or Wikipedia, in this manner, and if these articles were not well sourced, then I would never have included them. That would be unacceptable. Another point of contention is that the author is nominally anonymous, but I have contacted him and he is willing to be sourced personally on those articles. However, I would note that a part of Wikipedia's nature in and of itself rests largely on anonymity, for a variety of great reasons, and that alone should not preclude those sources from being cited. However, I am more than happy to follow the community consensus here; especially on the "ER" topic- and I'll admit this for full disclosure- but it is truly a noble thing those people do, and the conditions under which they operate and the services they provide make me, as an American, ashamed we have let our system get that way. Yes, I know, we're going for neutral tone, and we're not an advocacy group here, so I did the best I could to avoid bringing any of my personal feelings in on that topic. I would like to think I succeeded in that effort. However, this is absolutely not worth creating a WP:Battleground over on the pros or cons of using blogs as sources, or any such nonsense, and all three of those articles deserve only professionalism in the tone of addressing these concerns. That's pretty much it. Let me know your thoughts, thank you, and God Bless. Ks64q3 ( talk) 17:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
(out) WP requires "reliable sources." Blogs by their nature (no editorial supervision or fact checking, no accountability) even if they are written by Saint Jude are not in the category of "reliable sources." That a lot of articles use them is unfortunate - "other stuff exists" is not a reason for adding any. Many articles, in fact, have no real sources at all, and date back five years or more. Sources which are primarily editorial in nature, written by a well-known person may be used occasionally, but the opinions need to be cited as opinion, and not as fact. If this precis is wrong, please correct me. Collect ( talk) 13:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Is the online database ebsco a reliable source? It is a subscription database so the links would lead to a log in page. My question is can ebsco articles(information found on ebsco) be used as a reference for wikipedia? Smallman12q ( talk) 23:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Could let me know if a news paper article online is a reliable source, it is being used on the Banksy article, as follows.
Hi, much of this article on Donald P. Scott is sourced from fear.org, which I suspect may not be a reliable source. What do others think? Casliber ( talk · contribs) 13:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I tend to Squidfryerchef's views, and towards this organization's acceptability or reliability, especially if it just being used as a host for material originally published elsewhere. This is a legitimate organization, as these gbooks, gscholar and gnews searches show: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Citation by books from university presses and mainstream scholarly or legal publishers therein gives evidence toward it being "regarded as trustworthy or authoritative," although of course, it has a POV which should be accounted for in writing articles. John Z ( talk) 21:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Is it appropriate to use foreign language sources in English language Wikipedia (that is French or German government sources published in French and German) for numerical information like gallons/year? Mervyn Emrys ( talk) 03:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Center against Expulsions presents (only in German version of the site) an alleged table of expulsions http://www.z-g-v.de/aktuelles/?id=58 . It's a biased synthesis of quoted sources. A part of the table is quoted in Demographic estimates of the German exodus from Eastern Europe and an editor has removed even my POV template. I doubt we need such POV here. Xx236 ( talk) 08:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC) No comments yet. Xx236 ( talk) 07:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody vet this web site for reliability, please? Thank you! — pd_THOR | =/\= | 05:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
We're having a discussion over at Talk:Deaths in 2009#Derek Benfield as to whether death announcements (not, I stress, obituaries) in newspapers are reliable sources. The question is whether the announcements are checked sufficiently by newspaper staff (so we can be reasonably sure that the named person is indeed dead) or whether the notices are essentially classified ads (prepared and published without reference to the newspaper's editorial staff). The extent to which newspapers check such facts, if at all, isn't clear. 87.114.147.43 ( talk) 22:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Is [9] Rootsweb considered a reliable source for birth/death dates and related info? Earlier tonight, I used it to cite the birth date of Playboy Playmate Diane Webber and I just wanted to verify that it's okay to use them as a source. Webber's entry at that site is noted with a V for verified. Who does that, I'm not sure. The other source for her birth date that is in the article is a Playmate listing site at Univ. of Chicago. I've emailed the maintainer of that site a couple times in the past and they say that they often get their info direct from Playboy magazine. Playboy could have had Webber's DOB incorrect. It wouldn't be the first time but it's hardly a common thing either. Anyway, is Rootsweb reliable? Thanks, Dismas| (talk) 09:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, In an AfD discussion [10], we are debating if the Daily Vault is a RS. It appears to have staff writers [11] and an editorial staff [12]. I'd call it a RS, but I tend to be fairly unconcerned the reliability of about review sites for books/movies/etc., so I figured more input would be good. Thanks! Hobit ( talk) 20:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Much easier one. Edited by Rabbi Isaac Landman. Don't know if it's the same as "Universal Jewish Encyclopedia". Question: Use freely, use with attribution, or don't use? The discussion is at Talk:Shabbat if you need it. JJB 03:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The Metal Observer is cited in multiple articles relating to performers of heavy metal music. The website's coverage of band genres is inconsistent, its content appears to be user-submitted. Most reviews that I have seen from this website do not appear to be professionally written. Can anyone confirm the reliability of this website? ( Ibaranoff24 ( talk) 23:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC))
Incorrect re: the submissions I'm afraid. Genres being "inconsistent" is purely original research, only meaningful if you have reliable sources stating this directly. Content is not user-submitted: reviews are all written by staff members, not simply users. Metal Archives is not used because it does rely on user-submitted content. As far as the professionalism of the reviews goes, it varies certainly, but no more than any review source. Even the most highly regarded here (allmusic, Rolling Stone) have examples of poorly written reviews. But poorly written or not, they are still the opinions of a staff body engaged consistently in exploring and reviewing music releases. Prophaniti ( talk) 14:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
The list of staff members can be found here so contrary to what has been said above, the site's contents are not user-submitted. -- Bardin ( talk) 11:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
As well as Bardin's excellent points regarding their history and from Blabbermouth, a few extra things to throw in: Metal Observer has come up on this noticeboard before recently (brought up by myself), and two other users affirmed it.
It mentions in the FAQ section "We are a closed society for now, at least as far as reviewers are concerned", and reviewers and their profiles can be seen here [13]. So it does have it's own staff body, and they're not accepting people to become new reviewers currently. Bardin also provided a link to what sort of thing they're asking of staff. WP:ALBUM states that a site can be used in the professional reviews section so long as it has an editorial and writing staff, be they paid or volunteer.
In addition to this, a quick look at the statistics: it currently says they have about 14,000 album reviews. With a staff of 30, that's over 450 reviews per staff member. That's a pretty significant experience of heavy metal music. Prophaniti ( talk) 21:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Where do you get hundreds apiece> Again I ask.. have you actually read the bios. Outside of the anomally of the fansite owner with over 2000 most of the volunteers on the list have less than 50. So who actually posted enough reviews to get them over 14000??? Because the sum of the people listed on the staff page doesn't add up to a number near that high... again pushing reliable source even further into the hole on this one. No metal-dedicated online webzine is a reliable source for anything. And this one is no exception. (and yes age and jobs would outweigh review amounts... if they actually had any... which they don't) The Real Libs- speak politely 00:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Can I just point out that just because their title is "staff member", doesn't make them an authority. I can start a website right now and call myself "Ruler of the Universe", but unfortunately, that doesn't make me so. Professional music journalists (note "Professional", as in, they make their living from it) could grind this site into the ground. See NME and/or Q Magazine. Now they are reliable sources. Not this stuff. Scarian Call me Pat! 23:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
It looks like just some amateur website. Dlabtot ( talk) 23:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly with Bardin: a writer does not have to be paid to be authoritative or knowledgeable. It would be fair to say that someone who is paid for it and does it for a living may well know the subject matter better, but as I say, that doesn't rule out those who aren't paid. Just look at the number of reviews: 14,000. As I say, this translates as 450 reviews per author. Over a 9 year period this averages at 50 reviews a year; which in turn means 1 heavy metal review nearly every week by every reviewer for 9 years. Obviously staff will have been hired as time passed and so on, but nevertheless, this average clearly suggests a good understanding of the subject matter. Prophaniti ( talk) 09:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
This shouldn't be necessary...
Another point to those who are worried about their age: It's irrelevant. How many posts they've made is irrelevant. How many weeks they've been is irrelevant. Prophanti: This site has its own radio show? Many sites have their own "radioshow". Q Magazine has its own TV show on cable in the UK. Just because the site has existed for a long time (apparently), does not make it more trustworthy. There are still geocities sites and yahoo sites kicking around from the mid-late nineties. And in response to "just because they're not paid" (paraphrased): It's a good indicator of their ability. If you could find the full-time professions of these "reviewers" then we can see how trustworthy and notable their reviews are. Scarian Call me Pat! 13:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I read over some of the reviews for Motorhead, as my biggest knowledge is in that area. Two articles told me they were heavy metal, one article told me they weren't and mentions that some peeps never thought they were, and would leave that discussion up to the forum boards. I couldn't find anywhere that rates them as a site in terms of have a reputation, so if someone could provide with me some links I'd be grateful. I therefore agree with Dlabtot's points that this site doesn't yet meet a number of bars of WP:RS.-- Alf melmac 10:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Just to put some boring stats on this – using Alexa page rankings comes up with the following results. Now, I know Alexa has its faults and concerns, but when comparing sites of a similar nature, it will have a fair degree of meaning. Also, this is in relation to the point that was made about MO being widely used on other websites not to make any claims as an RS (because I've already said none of these sites can make that claim).
If anyone was here to argue the "lots of people cite x as a source" point about MA, they may have had a valid argument (but still one which would be disproven). As it is MO, though, I have to say again: why? – B.hotep • talk• 09:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
The Portland Mercury, used at David Miscavige, namely this article [14]. Please post comments at Talk:David_Miscavige#RSN. Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 20:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Sources questioned:
I really need extra eyeballs on this. I stumbled over Accrediting Commission International, which suffered from many issues including potential attack page; I stubbed it per attack page policy, and immediately heard from two editors who provided a bit more sourcing, from which I carefully peeled back items that did not appear reliable or compliant with sourcing. It appears to me after initial dialog that (1) the sources are still thoroughly questionable; (2) they are now used very widely on WP for stating that accreditors are " accreditation mills", a derogatory term, based on the efforts of dedicated watchers of such "mills"; (3) this has created a longtime walled garden of support for continuance in really poor sourcing.
My data:
What do you guys think of these sources for making allegations of fraud against living persons, and for making other negative allegations upon the alleged mills? What should their own articles reflect about their expertise in this field? Is there sufficient evidence that edits in this field really need more review? Thanks.
Thanks, Jc, but your arguments are almost identical to those of the three other editors I described, right down to suggesting the possibility of shills for the mills. I was looking for other editors who could look at this from a fresh perspective who have had no prior experience with diploma mills (like myself, incidentally). Your statement "evil people" speaks for itself. Your statement of misrepresentation of Oregon is unfounded, because Oregon does make the statement I quoted and it is unclear to me what scope it has. The fact that USDE and CHEA and Bear all like each other is only one side of the story; look, the only outside reference in Bear's article is CBS, which gives him the very faint praise "who's written books on diploma mills", hardly the third-party-recognized expertise required by WP:SPS. And if a firm is criticized by the government in another way, we don't usually create categories and lists and articles of "firms criticized by governments" as if NPOV. If it's so obvious what an unaffiliated accreditor is, that should be stated clearly. The fact is that since we are talking about groups that disagree on jurisdiction (academia-government versus unaffiliated accreditors), I see no NPOV treatment possible except by stating other objective criteria. But I'm getting offtrack; the point of this request is the reliability of the sources under the policies, such as being self-published sources making derogatory claims about living persons. Thanks! JJB 19:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Stephan, and sorry! Two followups: What authorities do you see as acknowledging Levicoff as an expert? And a pay-per-view article must still be cited in its own right (not as hearsay) and quoted in talk if debatable, according to WP:V, correct? JJB 20:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess that discussion at WT:V fizzled out without agreement. So combining everyone's views, I am of opinion that Levicoff/Name It is subject to WP:SELFPUB, Bear and Degree.net are only subject to verifiability, and attribution in cases of multiple POVs, ODA is fine if quoted accurately, and hearsay needs double attribution if nobody has the PPV. I will still be looking for third-party independent testimonies of the expertise of Bear and Degree.net, which have not materialized. If Dlabtot or anyone wants to chime in too, great. JJB 03:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Interesting that JJB claims that he needs to "still be looking for third-party independent testimonies of the expertise of Bear and Degree.net." I made the following information available yesterday to JJB. John Bear has authored or co-authored 34 books (not all are distance learning or diploma mill related). Here's a few. The Chronicle of Higher Education says, John Bear, an expert on distance-learning institutions and diploma mills who is a co-author of the Bears' Guide to Earning Degrees by Distance Learning. There's probably dozens of other wp:RS articles that reference John Bear as an expert on the subject. TallMagic ( talk) 19:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody please vet this website for reliability please? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 23:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
A website called Assyrian RAF Levies is being used as a source for the Assyrians in the United Kingdom article. The site is fairly amateurish and I can't find details of its author(s), although it does contain lots of potentially useful information. What raised my concern was that it refers to a Battle of Sarande in 1945, when the battle by this name actually occured in 1940 and involved different parties. I'm therefore looking for advice on whether this is a reliable source. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm a newcomer to wikipedia.
There used to be a wikipedia page for an ISKCON Guru named Sankarshan Das Adhikari. It was created by another user, edited diligently by a few editors until Feb 25 2009, when it was deleted because 2 wikipedia editors thought there wasn't enough "notability" established. This person is not an academic researcher, so there aren't publications of that nature. The things that set him apart from other religious leaders are:
1. A practising disciple of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, founder of ISKCON 2. Pioneered Internet preaching from the year 2000 onwards, with a daily email newsletter with 10,000 unique readers, containing a thought for the day, and questions and answers 3. He answers each email from a reader himself personally 4. Has made 6 world tours and many more North America tours, at least 2 tours per year 5. Founded at least 1 new centers, helped to establish others 6. Many blogs, facebook groups, etc., exist 7. Over 70 initiated disciples and growing
A biodata is available at:
http://www.iskconpreacher.com/bio.htm
There are newspaper clippings from various language publications, and Internet sources to show what he does.
Now, how can official wikipedia-style notability be established for such a personality, who is notable in so many respects?
Also, how can the data from the existing page, before it was deleted, be recovered for backup purposes?
Any help would be appreciated. Bindumadhava ( talk) 21:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
In particular can information in the following article [16] be used in Warren National University? The discussion on Talk:Warren_National_University#WNU_was_apparently_a_bigger_joke_than_some_of_us_thought has one editor saying that the article shouldn't be used because it is a completely biased article and the person being interviewed in the article, the ex-Chief Academic Officer of WNU, is never named. I agree that it seems strange that the ex-CAO is never named but my thought is that perhaps she had a contract with WNU saying that she wouldn't be named in any articles about WNU or something. Anyway, there's some information in there that helps explain why WNU failed to get accreditation that I thought would improve the article. We appreciate any and all comments. Thanks, TallMagic ( talk) 03:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
That makes sense to me. So for example (may or may not go in the article, I just wanted to find a quick example. Here's the exact quote.
<qoute>By April, this imminently qualified and experienced academician had raised a “lot of questions” about the preparation for accreditation. Paul and a board member from California visited her and “essentially told me to shape up and get in line and do what the party line is saying or I would not be an employee.”</quote>
Here's a potential addition to the WNU article.
In a Cheyenne Herald editorial interview with the Chief Academic Officer of WNU, in April the CAO was told by the owner to reel in some of her attempted preparations for accreditation or she would not be an employee any longer.
comment? TallMagic ( talk) 04:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I came across mondaq.com being used in a BLP article. On first glance, it appears to be a legitmate legal/accounting site but a look at the about section revealed a price list (for publication) and the following:
While the testimonials section has comments such as:
Surely for our purposes, a site where editoral control consists of "please make the cheque out to.." is worthless? The site is being used in a *lot* of articles. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 01:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Clearly, mondaq.com is well outside the boundaries of what we consider a reliable source. Dlabtot ( talk) 17:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Are memoirs published by major, reputable U.S. publishing houses reliable sources? Are they only reliable if they cite sources? I wonder because I wasn't sure whether a memoir is considered fact or opinion. Maybe they are blends of both, but lean more toward opinion if they lack citations to sources? BB22030 ( talk) 13:38, 25 March 2009
Thank you for your help, Abecedare. The memoir that I refer to is "A Reporter's Life," by Walter Cronkite, published by Alfred A. Knopf in 1996. Page 223 of the memoir is quoted in the Clay T. Whitehead article. The statements cited in the Whitehead article are not about the author, Walter Cronkite, and his own life, but about Clay T. Whitehead. I checked the book out of the library to see if Mr. Cronkite referenced a newspaper article or speech for the quoted statement, but the book doesn't have footnotes or any references.
In case it is useful to you, here is the sentence in the Clay T. Whitehead article that cites to the Cronkite memoir: "With the Nixon Administration's hostility toward network TV news broadcasts growing, Whitehead suggested to affiliate stations, notoriously more conservative than national newsrooms, that they did not need to carry network news reports, and instead could rely on wire dispatches, in an attempt to reduce the influence of more liberal, critical newscasters like Walter Cronkite on the American public."
Do you think this factual sentence that cites to the Cronkite memoir is reliable if it is about someone other than Mr. Cronkite (that he seemed to dislike) and that isn't supported with independent sources?
Thanks again for your help.
Good morning. Reviewing this report I've found that chicasperuanas.com is included into the articles as a reference (see here). I wonder if this sort of site is appropiate as a reference cause IMHO is nearly a porn site with no or little information. Thanks for your attetion and best regards. -- Dferg ( w:en: - w:es:) 16:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Currently there is a debate going on in the Talk:Shibdas Ghosh whether a magazine is a reliable source to say one Shibdas Ghosh is a "Marxist Ideologist". I have almost lost interest talking to this user. Someone please look at this. 220.227.207.32 ( talk) 11:43, 27 March 2009
(UTC)
An article that I have been writing, No. 410 Squadron RCAF, is up for an A-Class review and three of the sources have been called into question, so I would like to know if they are a WP:RS. They are as follows:
TARTARUS talk 20:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
WP:V says "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Neither the author nor the book have any reputation, especially "for fact-checking and accuracy". Xx236 ( talk) 10:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
History of German settlement in Eastern Europe quotes the book extensively. I prefer not to edit this article, because User:Skäpperöd has attacked me and an another Polish editor. Xx236 ( talk) 08:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
an editor is disputing the RS status of a book book cite on Talk:1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot the book is already used as reliable source on two other wikipedia pages. this is the book..Brecher, Max (1993), A Passage to America, Bombay: Book Quest Publishers .ISBN ASIN B0000CP5CF. Can I use it as a reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Off2riorob ( talk • contribs)
The paper, Dharm P. S. Bhawuk, Culture's influence on creativity: the case of Indian spirituality, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Volume 27, Issue 1, February 2003, Pages 1-22, cites the book for some basic biographical information about Rajneesh and Tom Robbins quote on him (originally published in Seattle Post Intelligencer). What is the source being used for in the article under discussion ? Abecedare ( talk) 19:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Abecedare ( talk · contribs) that the book's writing style suggests a fringe, conspiratorial POV. Cirt ( talk) 20:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Abecedare ( talk I posted the new link that I was refering too.. quoting an alternative source for the quote..here... http://books.google.com/books?id=-Zn4k2WvKZUC&pg=PA17&dq=isbn:8120815998#PPA17,M1 have a look yourself.page 17( Off2riorob ( talk) 20:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
It is my opinion that Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh is a master of the same status as Buddha, Jesus, Lao Tzu or Pythagoras. His vision is to raise the consciousness of mankinf beyond the barbaric, biological endgame in which civilisation finds itself today, into the next stage of human evolution; from Homo sapiens to Homo nuvos ... the New Man.
He is the living embodiment of his vision; seeing him, being in his presence, one experiences some of the vast possibilities available to those who can bring their consciousness to the same peak. ...
this ....Bhagwan himself was never charged with any involvment in the conspiracy........was an early edit in this thread..does anyone disagree with it? and if you do then why? [ [26]] Bhagwan himself was never charged with any involvment in the conspiracy. ( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
that is indeed the point in question Abecedare ( talk)and I will be looking to verify comments made at that press conference...that is it..( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
this RS [27]is the book that I found to support the original book that is disputed here .( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
comment does'nt refer to the quote that I am looking at...the quote I am looking to verify is that charles turner said at a press interview ..and I quote..Turner said at a press conferance after the event that “I did not have any proof whatsoever linking Rajneesh to Sheela´s crimes" ( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
Are letters to the editor considered WP:reliable? In the Gilad Atzmon article, this [29] is used as a source, and quoted (debating the question of rationality of anti-semitism. I claimed that since Israel presents itself as the 'state of the Jewish people', and bearing in mind the atrocities committed by the Jewish state against the Palestinians, any form of anti-Jewish activity may be seen as political retaliation. This does not make it right.") in the article. I thought the source was not reliable, and deleted it, but then reverted myself. Any thoughts on the subject would be appreciated. Malcolm Schosha ( talk) 13:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody let me know if [30] could be considered reliable for Wikipedia. Thanks-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 11:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Roblox doesn't have a Wikipedia article, so how is that possible?-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 18:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The roblox Wikipedia article I brought to Deletion review is a new page I have been working on. The original roblox page was spam. No substance. Nothing.--
gordonrox24 (
talk) 22:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The bottom line is that nothing on Nationmaster is a reliable source for any Wikipedia article, except if there's a Nationmaster article and we source that for claims the company makes about itself. DreamGuy ( talk) 21:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
We hope to nominate Planescape: Torment at WP:FAC pretty soon, and there are concerns over the reliability of two sources: ActionTrip and RPGWatch. Some discussion over their reliability can be found at the peer review page, but some additional input would be much appreciated. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C) 21:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The issue at hand is http://www.gpradio.com.br/images/1/area/dados/institucional/documentos/t20_s_03-01-2009.pdf, a PDF document which apparently documents a study done by Crowley Broadcast Analysis for Group dos Professionales do Radio. For the sake of argument, I'll stipulate to everything: Crowley is a reputable survey firm, GPR is a reliable professional group with regard to Brazilian radio broadcasts, all of that.
Discussion at WT:Record charts#Brazilian charts has pretty much come to the conclusion that it is hard to treat it as an acceptable record chart. One editor, JuStar, has refused to acknowledge that consensus, and won't permit it to be removed.
So, my question at WP:RS: this document is a private document. It was found through one of those Google accidents ... an apparently private document, with no publicly viewable links that somehow wound up exposed to Google's search engine, and is now returned though Google searches. It's labeled Exclusivo para Group dos Professionales do Radio, which means "Exclusively for ... ". Can such documents be used for sources?— Kww( talk) 16:28, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
This non-RS seems to indicate "link:" is a sampling. Google's spider cannot find something that does not have a link to it. All it does is follow links. Whether it improperly processed a nofollow or nocache or bots.txt, I don't think we can tell. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 21:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if any of these websites were reliable: Teen Reads.com [31], Active Anime [32] and Graphic Novel Reporter.com [33]. Kaguya-chan ( talk) 20:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
In the page Shusha pogrom some Andrei Zubov is used as a reference to support the claims of the massacre, etc. The whole article has serious neutrality issues, and most sources used are completely unreliable, such as law schools, obscure politologists, etc. However Zubov is claimed to be a historian, but the analysis of the source shows that he is absolutely clueless about what happened in the Caucasus at the time. This is the original Russian text:
Британская администрация почему-то передала населенные армянами уезды Елизаветпольской губернии под юрисдикцию Азербайджана. Британский администратор Карабаха полковник Шательворт не препятствовал притеснениям армян, чинимым татарской администрацией губернатора Салтанова. Межнациональные трения завершились страшной резней, в которой погибла большая часть армян города Шуши. Бакинский парламент отказался даже осудить свершителей Шушинской резни, и в Карабахе вспыхнула война. Англичане пытались разъединить армянские и азербайджанские войска. Когда же они ушли из региона, азербайджанская армия была в начале ноября 1919 года полностью разгромлена армянами. Только вмешательство англичан смогло предотвратить поход армянских войск на Елизаветполь и Шемаху. [36]
Translation:
For some reason the British administration placed the Armenian populated uyezds of Elizavetpol gubernia under the Azerbaijani jurisdiction. The British administrator of Karabakh colonel Shuttleworth did not prevent the discrimination of Armenians by the Tatar administration of governor Sultanov. Interethnic tensions resulted in a horrible massacre, in which most Armenians in the town of Shusha perished. Baku parliament refused even to condemn the perpetrators of the Shusha massacre, and the war started in Karabakh. English tried to interfere between the Armenian and Azerbaijani troops, but when they left the region, the Azerbaijani army was completely defeated by the Armenians in early November 1919. Only the interference of the English prevented the march of the Armenian troops to Elizavetpol and Shemakha.
As one could see, this guy has no idea about what actually happened in the region, and when exactly. According to all sources, even those quoted in the article the fighting in Shusha took place in March 1920, when Azerbaijanis celebrated Novruz (precisely, on 22 - 26 March 1920). Zubov says that the fighting between Armenians and Azerbaijanis started after the "massacre" in Shusha, and as result of that the Azerbaijanis were defeated in November 1919, i.e. according to him the "massacre" in Shusha was in 1919, not in 1920. Moreover, he says that the British interfered to prevent the Armenian offensive towards Ganja, while in fact the British left Azerbaijan in August 1919. See for instance these sources:
While the Italians (wisely) never got involved in the Caucasus, the continuing pressure of demobilisation and calls for British troops in other places, forced withdrawals from the region. At the end of August, Baku and the Caspian naval personnel were evacuated. By about mid-October 1919 the only troops remaining in the Caucasus were three infantry battalions at Batum.
Keith Jeffery. Field Marshal Sir Henry Wilson: a political soldier. Oxford University Press, 2006ISBN 0198203586, 9780198203582, p 247
However, the British withdrew from Baku and Azerbaijan in August 1919, and the Soviets took over the Azerbaijan Republic in April 1920.
Andy Stern. Who won the oil wars? Collins & Brown, 2005 ISBN 1843402912, 9781843402916
Zubov has no idea what he is talking about. He does not know the basic facts, such as the date of the events in Shusha, the date when the British army left the region, etc. In my opinion, Zubov cannot be considered a reliable source on the topic of events in Shusha in 1920. Grand master 11:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Is Men's News Daily sufficiently reliable, for either facts or opinions, to be used in articles like Separatist feminism, Lev Navrozov, David Holcberg, Antifeminism, Andrea Dworkin, etc. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 20:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
There's some major problems rearing up on X-American articles. The population boxes are adding dubious representatives, some WP:BLP, of that ethnic group. Dutch Americans places Franklin Roosevelt and Martin van Buren, as, apparently, pristine representatives of Dutch Americans, though neither have been proven to have any more than a great-grandparent of that ancestry (in fact, for Van Buren, it's "great-great-great-great-grandfather Cornelis") - and neither have sources providing them as "Dutch Americans" merely of "some Dutch background." I think intervention will eventually be needed as many editors are incredibly hot-headed about their ethnicities' "known names." Bulldog123 16:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Re: Principality of Paganija & De Administrator Imperio
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to bring (the English Version) of Wikipedia’s Editors attention to some of the historical information on its web site. It concerns the former coastal Principality of Paganija in today's modern Croatia. As I am not a qualified history scholar I shall present my facts as clearly as possible.
Historical facts are being presented here which appear to be formulated using unscientific methods. One can only interpret this as to be politically motivated. The article states that the peoples of the former Medieval State of Paganija are of Serbian descent by using the "De Administrator Imperio" written by Roman Emperor Constantine VII Progenitors (Byzantine Empire), as it's only reference point. This statement contradicts the ethnic demographics of that region that as it exists today. The writers have not bothered to explain why this is the case! From a scholarly perspective the "De Administrator Imperio" cannot be used as source of factual information as it also has contradictions within its own paragraphs.This makes De Administrator Imperio a questionable source of historic information about this region.
There are two chapters telling two different versions of the arrival of Croatians to the region. The sections about the arrival of Serbs are nearly identical to one of stories telling the arrival of Croatians. The chapters read as an ancient form of rewrite of the migration pattern of same peoples (as if the author lacked historical information). Chapters also use mythic Croatian narratives as fact! Also De Administrator Imperio is describing events that took place three centuries before it was written. With this in mind, information in De Administrator Imperio concerning the Principality of Paganija can be put in serious doubt.Why haven't secondary references been represented, such as the historical perspectives from the other Chronicles written in that period? The Chronicle De Regno Sclavorum from 753 is a good example. This document makes more sense as it was written within that period of history and it confirms the ethnic demography of that area. The De Regno Sclavorum is believed to have been written at the congress of Southern Slavs in the Bosnian town of Dalmae (today’s Duvno). Noted famous historian J.B Bury has expressed problems with certain paragraphs of "De Administrator Imperio" this can all be referenced easily.
Secondly when talking about certain facts concerning the demography of that region of Damatia(Croatia), Wikipedia’s historical article on Paganija makes a mockery of everyday life as we know it. They misrepresent the ethnic origins of the people who live in this region. The facts of who really makes up the population of the area can be gained from an examination of several sources. For example:
(a) The recent Croatian census that was conducted in the region. (b) The Austro-Hungarian census compiled in the 19th century. (c) The recorded and documented Croatian History of the peoples of the “Republic of Ragusa”, which is now called Dubrovnik. Dubrovnik is just south of the old Medieval State of Paganija. The unreliable sources used by Wikipedia would make them of Serbian descent. Croatian literature from Dubrovnik (Republic of Ragusa) goes back centuries (reference is drawn to their long established history archives located in their libraries). Writers from Dubrovnik have a long established history of interaction with their peers from the Venetian Republic and Europe. This is a well established fact both in Dalmatia and in the rest of Croatia.
(d) There are Croatian costumes and folkloric dances that have been passed down for centuries from one generation to another. These dances are still actively performed today. (e) People who migrated from that region that I know refer to themselves as Croatian or of Croatian descent. (f) All the towns and councils of this region state on their web sites that they are Croatians.
These are just some of the facts that are known and it’s just the tip of the iceberg. With all that is stated above "De Administrator Imperio" just does not make any sense! There is always the possibility that this misleading information can be used in the future as a propaganda weapon. One can only recall the recent former Yugoslavian Wars and how much pain, misery and death it brought.
I have researched the “www.britannica.com Dalmatia Region Croatia web site (this is a more updated version) and they do not mention “De Administrator Imperio Chronicles” as an historical reference for the Dalmatian Region. This omission is obviously due to the fact that this reference is considered contradictory and therefore unreliable for that region. Maybe Wikpedia could consider adopting the same approach as www.britanica.com.
Due to the very nature of the Internet and its growing power in presenting information to society, I sincerely ask that Wikipedia look into my concerns.
Sincerely
123.2.59.195 (
talk) 10:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to join up and join in the effort Unomi ( talk) 12:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
We would consider an academic peer reviewed journal as a Reliable Source for an article about a topic. How far can we take the same journal as reliable in describing iteslf? If it says on the title page that it was published in 1957, can we take that as true, or are we obliged to find another publication that verifies it? Martinlc ( talk) 13:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure where to put this question, but I'll give it a try here. I'm trying to add a relevant video for the external links portion of the Chemtrail conspiracy theory. Would the following video be considered reliable(would it fit into the external links section).
Smallman12q ( talk) 21:19, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
The first talking head starts by talking about cloud seeding, not chemtrails. Not a good start, but as she continues the evidence presented is secondhand hearsay, "I was told initially by a friend, he said his brother was in the military service..." (0:29).
The second talking head (1:02) is probably just confused, but he doesn't explain himself well enough to know how to refute it. It sounds like he's describing someone looking from the ground up at contrails from airlines and military aircraft "in the same airspace" and comparing the residence time of the contrails. What does "in the same airspace" mean? If it means they were in the same field of view while looking up from the ground (that was my interpretation), it tells us nothing about the altitude of the aircraft. And from the ground, and only seeing the contrails, it's difficult to tell the difference between an aircraft at 30,000 ft and 45,000 ft. As I said, it's entirely too vague in the video to tell what he's specifically talking about. Even if he did see military contrails persisting for longer than civilian contrails, there are plenty of accepted scientific reasons for them. The military aircraft could be flying at an altitude where the air is closer to saturation, which would mean the contrails would persist for longer.
The third segment is a guy saying he saw two suspicious contrails from KC-135s while touring a civilian air traffic control tower. They were "identified" as military aircraft, but says he didn't see them, only their contrails, and their radio callsigns were identified as Petrol 1 and Petrol 2. If the aircraft were not visible from the air traffic control tower were not visible, they were not on the tower frequency or in the tower's airspace. The information presented that he saw this while visiting a control tower is a red herring to make the viewer think they were flying at a low altitude. However, he didn't see them, this means they could be flying at any altitude, including high enough to make normal contrails.
In addition to the information presented in the video being unverifiable, it is also not presented in a neutral point of view. All three of the talking heads were convinced that chemtrails exist and that it's a military conspiracy. But there was no alternative evidence presented attempting to rebut the claims, which is actually quite easy to do. There may have been in the original Discovery Channel episode, but the clip provided is only 2 minutes long, and ends abruptly after the third talking head gets done. While ELs are not required to be NPOV, the addition of this link would be placing undue weight on the side that advocates "the truth" of the conspiracy theory.
TLDR summary: the information presented in the video is factually inaccurate, unverifiable, and not NPOV and as such should not be included as external links. - Atmoz ( talk) 04:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
The layout of this webpage appears to be in a blog-style format - but it is the official website of the publisher AbeBooks. Reliable source for information on what books were bestsellers from the AbeBooks publisher itself? Cirt ( talk) 17:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Could someone take a look at Talk:Siena_College and perhaps offer opinions? It's a lengthy, very lame discussion about the location of the college. I have a dog in the fight, so I'm probably not the best person to summarise. As far as I can tell, published sources, and the college, overwhelmingly say "Siena is in Loudonville" but there are a few editors who feel that maps show that it is probably in nearby Newtonville. IMO, an editor's interpretation of a map which does not show clear boundaries is not a reliable source. I'd be grateful for any input. Thanks. -- hippo43 ( talk) 22:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree that reading a map is not original research. Maps are used as references in multiple FA articles on roads and highways. Should we then start deleting those references and their info from Featured Articles some of which are primarily edited by admins? A map was one of the main arguments for keeping North River (Hudson River) instead of merging it with Hudson River. A map was used as definitive proof for keeping out Mapinfo as a "company in Troy, New York" due to the map showing that it wasnt in Troy even though its ZIP code is, it politically was in a neighboring town. In multiple discussions hippo refuses to accept any commonsense such as that above, claiming OR and all that. There were three or four sources for Newtonville when I first put it in. They werent "reliable", they are however more reliable than anything hippo has come up with. Siena College has a conflict of interest in saying Loudonville (read my rants on the talk page of the article). As for ZIP code that someone here mentioned- the official USPS city name for that ZIP code is Albany, NOT Loudonville, Loudonville is only one of two other alternative names (the other being Siena, which isnt even a hamlet). The town hall of the town of Colonie is directly across from the campus and the town says its address is Newtonville. The Newtonville PO does not do home delivery only PO boxes that is why the college must use the ZIP code it does. Hippo doesnt wish to discuss hamlets or anything but "the college says its in Loudonville". I'm sorry this is so long, I'm trying to catch everyone up on our point of view on why Loudonville alone is not acceptable. As for those asking for an older map, see Colonie, New York, the name Newtonville goes right over where Siena College is today on the 1866 map on that article, Loudonville is considerably farther south. Camelbinky ( talk) 02:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you squidfryerchef, I suppose your right about that. Hippo- are you really saying a poetry book, and a book on the Italian American Experience are authoritative on where Siena College is? Reliable verifiable sources are not just about them being good/bad overall, its about their relevance. Those sources you put have no relevance or research into where the college is. Siena College has a conflict of interest, their website is not useable you can not say they arent using Loudonville simply because it is an acceptable alternative for their ZIP code, they can say they are in the city of Albany and legitimately use that as their mailing address, it doesnt make them in Albany. But of course if they did we'd still have this argument and you'd insist we'd have to list the campus as being in Albany. Am I wrong? If I am right then your argument loses water, so tell me how it and your opinion would be different if they had substituted Albany for Loudonville on everything. Because there is nothing stopping the college from doing that any time. It is not an unlikely or hypothetical question, there is no reason it couldnt happen. A blog while not reliable shows that there are local people who believe that the campus could be in Newtonville, you (I believe) are in Texas how would you know what the locals consider the campus to be in? But that doesnt matter to you of course. It does to those of us who are locals, those that care about this article and articles of the area and want them to be factually correct. You have now started an edit war on Loudonville, New York saying that the hamlet is actually a town and have been warned by multiple editors to stop editing in face of concensus. Camelbinky ( talk) 21:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Somebody keeps inserting into Kaitsepolitseiamet, article on the Estonian Defence Police, claims taken from the personal blog of one Risto Teinonen, a noted neo-Nazi. Can such a blog be considered a WP:RS for claims such as "KAPO appears to be a criminal civil service"? Can insertion of such material be considered vandalism? Διγουρεν Εμπρος! 18:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
is www.rapbasement.com a suitable reference for an album's track listing? i dont think so but other users on the page Fantasy Ride do think so. ( Lil-unique1 ( talk) 19:30, 4 April 2009 (UTC))
I was helping out with editing on the article System of a Down, and I wanted to check the reliability of a few sources that are cited in the article:
Are these any good at all? The Rock City News link looks somewhat unprofessional and I have no idea what authority/notability Hard Radio/Shockwaves Online and Musicmight hold. ( Ibaranoff24 ( talk) 03:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC))
Is this a reliable source. yousaf465'
Thanks,yes it was the book review I was referring to.-- yousaf465' 16:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I'm wondering about this edit, and what people think about using commercial sites to verify the existence and other details about some liqueurs on the list for which we have no other independently verifiable information. The discussion at the talk page has seemed to come down to a question of whether it's appropriate to use a commercial site to verify something when no non-commercial site can be found.
Thanks in advance for any input, either here, or at Talk:List of liqueurs. - GTBacchus( talk) 22:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Is www.city-data.com a reliable source for demographic and other city data? I thought I had seen that it was not but I cannot locate any discussion on the topic. Thanks, Alanraywiki ( talk) 23:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
OK, I've looked at all kinds of sources and they seem to be zeroing in on something. The short answer is, if we allowed original research here, and it was my job to draw the border between Loudonville and Newtonville, the northern boundary of Siena campus would be the border. I'll go through them here.
1. The college uses the address of Loudonville. Google Books shows it was considered in Loudonville since its founding in the 1930s. Every mention of the college's address in print or on the web ( except for WP and some pages quoting the WP ) show Loudonville or Colonie, not Newtonville.
2. Maps. We've looked at several maps, from Mapquest, Google Earth, the US Geological Survey, and a historic map from 1866. None of them place a border around Newtonville or Loudonville. Some of them shade in an area above the college and mark it Newtonville, or they label the post office, or they label the Loudon/Maxwell crossroads as Newtonville, but none of them mark the campus itself as being in either hamlet.
However, there is at least one outlier. Yahoo Maps puts the dot for Newtonville right at the entrance to campus. I don't know why it does this ( it's not interpolating the address of the post office ) but I still think the other maps, especially the ones not generated by computer, take precedence. Is an online-generated map an RS at that level of detail?
3. Post offices. The Newtonville PO shares ZIP code 12110 with Latham, the hamlet just to the north. The streets that are clearly in Newtonville also use 12110. Siena on the other hand uses 12211 for its own post office, which it shares with an Albany PO. The streets that are clearly in Loudonville use 12211; there is no physical Loudonville post office, but Loudonville is an acceptable city name.
4. Neighbors. The Schuyler Meadows Country Club just next door, [39] and which extends a little further to the north, also uses a Loudonville address.
5. Delivery addresses. While ZIP codes are defined by streets and addresses and not by zones on a map, in all but the most rural areas they generally do form boundaries. The streets just above the campus, Fiddler's Ln, Cherrywood Ter, and Middlefield Dr, use Newtonville 12110 according to the USPS address lookup. Private roads in the area belonging to the college don't appear in the database.
The campus, at 515 Loudon Rd, uses Loudonville 12211. Across the street, the NYSP facility at #504 also uses Loudonville. Campus View Drive, across from the college's Friars Rd entrance, uses Loudonville. The town hall at #534, across from the northern border of campus, uses Newtonville. At #552 is the Newtonville Post Office.
This all hints at a boundary around 530, right at the edge of campus.
6. Real estate. A local Realtor's description, which I would consider an expert SPS, has Newtonville is not an incorporated town, but rather a loosely defined area--a neighborhood really--beside the also nebulous Loudonville, both of which lie within the town of Colonie. Roughly speaking, Newtonville runs along Route 9 from Siena College to Hoffman's Playland, taking in part of Maxwell Road to the west and over to Fiddlers Lane to the east of Route 9. Loudonville lies to the south of Newtonville.
I'm reading "from Siena College" as exclusive. Again, I would draw the border right at the north edge of campus. It might zigzag a hundred yards on the even side of the road to get all of the town hall parking lot, but that's what the sources say.
8. Zoning. The zoning map for Colonie [40] doesn't show a border. Loudonville and most of Newtonville are zoned single family residential. There is a narrow historic overlay zone along Loudon Rd as far as Maxwell, but that's simply where the old mansions are, as opposed to the shopping plazas to the north, not a neighborhood border.
9. The phone company. Telephone numbers seem to change from a 78X office code to a 43X prefix somewhere further south of where the post office splits the addresses. Newtonville addresses have phone numbers that start with 783, 786, 713. So does the college. Most other Loudonville addresses have phone numbers that start with 432, 434, 435. But I wouldn't make too much of this; a NXX lookup simply shows 783 as Colonie and 432 as Albany. Not Loudonville or Newtonville.
10. So the written sources overwhelmingly say Loudonville, ranging from books, university materials, self-published materials, and collection of postal data. The maps show that Newtonville is close by but none of them has a border. While it's tempting to cluster the campus with the adjacent Newtonville, especially when it is separated from the rest of Loudonville by wide-open areas, that would be original guesswork. In addition the USGS map shows a creek bed above the campus which could very well have been a natural and ancient border. The Yahoo map may not be RS for such fine detail. The zoning map didnt have relevant information, and the telephone city codes dont mention Newtonville or Loudonville.
11. The article should however mention Newtonville. We've run into an odd duck here; the campus is on the outskirts of the larger hamlet L, but almost across the street is the village center of the tiny hamlet of N. Some people visiting campus are going to see Newtonville on their online maps or GPS and wonder if theyre in the right place, and those touring the area on mountain bike will see Newtonville on their topo maps. It would be appropriate to mention, in a description of the campus, that it's close to the Newtonville Post Office and Newton Plaza, in the same context we might mention the country club and cemetery on the other side of campus.
12. We should word it carefully to avoid a false compromise like "Siena is near Newtonville but has a Loudonville mailing address". Its neighbors to the west, east, and south also use a Loudonville mailing address, because theyre all on the edge of Loudonville. Making an issue of the address would make sense if the college were in Troy, but it isn't. Squidfryerchef ( talk) 16:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
There is more I can have issue with but will address what I need to go over with for now- go to Mapquest and ask for a map of the college's address as listed by hippo, with Loudonville as he insists. It wont come up with anything. Try it with Newtonville. It then shows up. So I dont know how you came up with that online maps crap shows it to be in Loudonville and that there is no dispute, this just adds one more piece of circumstantial evidence that shows there is a dispute. It's neighbors to the west DONT use Loudonville, the Colonie Memorial Town Hall uses Newtonville, those to the north on Fiddlers Lane use Latham (and USPS gives them the option of using Newtonville). Its really hard to call much of what you said "original research as some of it is "original make-up crap" really no disrespect, I dont mean you are lying or intentionally distorting facts, there just isnt any research that you did you do to even think that the "creek bed" could be the ancient boundary. It's not. I'm sorry if this is considered "more OR" or my opinion, but I am considered by some to be an expert on the geography and history of the CD, I've seriously been reading, researching, and studying the history and geography of this area that I LOVE soo much, and really to have outsiders come in and while well-meaning slow down progress, I had someone tag as "suspicious" the assertion in the Albany, NY article that Albany was the fourth oldest city in the US, the second oldest state capital city, and oldest surviving settlement of the 13 colonies, it wasnt (like almost all the article at that time, it was pretty slim on citations I admit) but it slowed down progress that had just started building on upgrading the article by having a suspicious tag.(the Siena College article hasnt been ruined I'm not saying that, but it has happened elsewhere, not just to me but to other editors pride and joy geo & hist related articles by well-meaning good-faith edits that gut content or add false info). Btw- we use the old Dutch word kill in Albany, generally creek is from non-natives and some map makers who dont realize kill already means creek, such as mapmakers putting Normanskill Creek instead of Normans Kill as DOT signs say on the bridges; just one of those oddities that show non-natives should do their due diligence and respect natives when they mention these things, I would and have done the same for others in articles others know more about. I'm sorry if I go off on tangents and make my arguments long, I know hippo throws a fit about that. To be honest I have a disorder on the autism spectrum (asperger's syndrome) and disorders normally associated with those that have autism. I hope hippo understands its not that I'm being rude or whatever he has been thinking everytime he calls me out for typing so much I consider it him being rude, but at least I understand that he didnt know, but now you do. Camelbinky ( talk) 21:31, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I would like to point out about the 1866 map, the comment that the Newtonville Post Office was labelled on the map but not the village, the same can be said of Cohoes, which in the 1840s became an incorporated village of the town but on that map is named only by Cohoes P.O.. To the other comment on the ultimate authority of what constitutes Newtonville is the boundary of the land that John M. Newton purchased; then also the same can be said of Loudonville constituting the original Ireland's Corners in which case Siena college is in neither hamlet but instead is in farm countryside between the two and can best be described as being in Loudonville's ZIP code as you have well demonstrated. Does any of this help? 24.182.142.254 ( talk) 06:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
The 1866 map mentions both Loudonville and Irelands Corner P.O., does that matter at all? Are we sure they are the same thing? Why was the post office expanded and the name changed to Loudonville in 1871, when the map shows that Loudonville was a name in use prior to the post office using that name.
On Sathya Sai Baba (an article which could stand more eyeballs), there is a currently a dispute about whether Dale Beyerstein and Basava Premananda are reliable sources. Radiantenergy ( talk · contribs) argues here that they are not reliable, while White adept ( talk · contribs) disagrees. What do others think? ← Spidern → 18:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Just to clarify: The source in question is this paper: http://www.bcskeptics.info/resources/papers/saibaba by Prof. Dale Beyerstein. This is perhaps the most comprehensive study of all available on the topic of the purported miracles. In that particular section of the article, this was perhaps the only academic source and, I feel, it is one of the best and most comprehensive, in comparison to other sources available on the topic. If you see the talk - besides me at least two other editors have pointed out this source as being insightful. In another user's words [43] :"Honestly, I enjoy the bc skeptic http://www.bcskeptics.info/resources/papers/saibaba/ as far more interesting reading, because at least he quotes the material sources, which I really need to do some digging to verify". User:Ombudswiki had also suggested it as an academic source. White adept ( talk) 19:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Vegetation and slope stability is suffering major mutilationat the hands of User:Radhakrishnansk who is obviously a sock of banned User:Suciindia who in turn socked under the cloak of User:Sekharlk (who claimed his name to be Sekhar Lukose Kuriakose [44] and it is more than mere coincidence that one of the articles our User:Radhakrishnansk has cited bears the names of Kuriakose S.L (See the second ref. in Vegetation and slope stability). The real person behind these socks had only two areas of interest. One is a minor Indian political party Socialist Unity Centre of India and its many related articles and a bit of geography. See this also.
This cu case also is a pointer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Suciindia The guy who probably hails from Kerala learnt a bit of geography from ITC Enschede the IP of which is [ [45]]. If you check the contributions of that IP [46] it is evident that the person behind these socks was there. The disturbing thing is that this guy has not learnt the way WP works and through socking and reverting is trying to push his pov, self promotion etc. On Talk:Vegetation and slope stability he makes some funny exhortations:
Dear editors, this article necessitates considerable editing. The content is excellent and factual. I will attempt to do it in the coming days, but I request more able editors to reduce the essay like nature of this article.--Radhakrishnansk (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
It looks like his purpose is to re-write the article inserting his pov and his own sources. This is the home page of the guy and the strange admixture in the hall of fame (Stalin and Che among scientists and poets) reflects the sort of person who is behind the socks. Talk:Shibdas Ghosh has some discussions related to this guy's attempt to push through non-RS. Uzhuthiran ( talk) 18:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Someone has questioned Store norske leksikon as a reliable source, saying that almost anyone can edit it. [47] I have read some of what it says about itself and have been accepting it as reliable. [48] Since it is used as a source for a great many interesting articles on Norwegian subjects on Wikipedia, I would like to be sure of its reliability. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 20:29, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, could podcasts be considered reliable sources depending on where they're from. As there are lots of podcasts on the Stratfor website, which is a reliable website. Could podcasts from reliable websites be used? Deavenger ( talk) 22:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Depends for what. Shiite history? Rock solid reliable. As a citation for a matter of recent fact? Never reliable. For an opinion? Sometimes, depending on due weight and how close to his area of expertise the matter is. Bali ultimate ( talk) 22:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Appointments and awards Cole was awarded Fulbright-Hays fellowships to India (1982) and to Egypt (1985-1986). From 1999 until 2004, Juan Cole was the editor of The International Journal of Middle East Studies. He has served in professional offices for the American Institute of Iranian Studies.[4] He was elected president of the Middle East Studies Association of North America in November 2004.[5] In 2006, he received the James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism administered by Hunter College.[6]
1975 B.A. History and Literature of Religions, Northwestern University 1978 M.A. Arabic Studies/History, American University in Cairo 1984 Ph.D. Islamic Studies, University of California Los Angeles 1984-1990 Assistant Professor of History, University of Michigan 1990-1995 Associate Professor of History, University of Michigan 1992-1995 Director, Center for Middle Eastern and North African Studies, University of Michigan 1995- Professor of History, University of Michigan
The blog has won various awards; as of April 2006 the most prominent is the 2005 James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism from Hunter College.[23] It has also received two 2004 Koufax Awards: the "Best Expert Blog" and the "Best Blog Post".[24] It has since dropped off the list, but Informed Comment has been ranked as the 99th most popular blog on the Internet by Technorati on October 21, 2006.[25]
Cole has been cited in the press as a Middle East expert several times since 1990.[19] However, he was considered obscure outside his field prior to 2002, when he began publishing his weblog.[20] From 2002 onwards, Cole has been an active commentator in the UK and US media on topics related to the Middle East. His focus has primarily been Iraq, Iran, The Palestinian Authority, and Israel. He has published op-eds on the Mideast at the Washington Post, Le Monde Diplomatique, The Guardian, the San Jose Mercury News, the San Francisco Chronicle, The Boston Review, The Nation, the Daily Star, Tikkun magazine as well as at Salon.com, where he is a frequent contributor.[21] He has appeared on the PBS Lehrer News Hour, Nightline, ABC Evening News, the Today Show, Anderson Cooper 360°, Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, Al Jazeera and CNN Headline News.[22]
Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.
Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.
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 25 | ← | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | → | Archive 35 |
Hello! I have a question on using The Daily Kos as a source for Wikipedia edits. The relevant articles are Remote Area Medical, Nursing, and UVA SON. I am the editor who added those sources; I'm trying to get an impartial ear here, so I created another account to get some advice from those currently uninvolved with the brou-ha-ha over there. Anywhoo, I tried to include sources to The Myth of a Recession-Proof Job: Nursing, as well as The Busiest Emergency Room in America. Now, I understand the general principle of blogs being potentially unreliable sources- except that on both of those articles, there is extensive research chronicled well, and well-cited in both of them. I went through the links to verify the information was correct, and I even took an extra step on the "ER" room article, and contacted the head of the Remote Area Medical clinic to verify that article properly represented that clinic in Wise, VA.
Now, I believe part of the problem these people had with these sources was that they assumed I was the author, which is incorrect, and I can happily substantiate via IRL sources, as well as my communication with RAM's founder. If that was the case, obviously it would provide a COI, even though personal promotion would be hard to accomplish if the author is anonymous. I also found out via searching the DailyKos site that those articles were both reviewed by administrators there to verify it's content/veracity, which I can provide evidence of (or anyone familiar with DailyKos can verify personally via their account there). Indeed, I discovered he plans on hosting the "ER" article on his website, via the author's permission, to help chronicle the event.
Now, I think those are both important articles containing relevant information to the events, and, as such, would constitute a reliable source. Sources on blogs are no more relevant than citing Wikipedia in scholarly work. I understand the reluctance to rely solely on either a blog, or Wikipedia, in this manner, and if these articles were not well sourced, then I would never have included them. That would be unacceptable. Another point of contention is that the author is nominally anonymous, but I have contacted him and he is willing to be sourced personally on those articles. However, I would note that a part of Wikipedia's nature in and of itself rests largely on anonymity, for a variety of great reasons, and that alone should not preclude those sources from being cited. However, I am more than happy to follow the community consensus here; especially on the "ER" topic- and I'll admit this for full disclosure- but it is truly a noble thing those people do, and the conditions under which they operate and the services they provide make me, as an American, ashamed we have let our system get that way. Yes, I know, we're going for neutral tone, and we're not an advocacy group here, so I did the best I could to avoid bringing any of my personal feelings in on that topic. I would like to think I succeeded in that effort. However, this is absolutely not worth creating a WP:Battleground over on the pros or cons of using blogs as sources, or any such nonsense, and all three of those articles deserve only professionalism in the tone of addressing these concerns. That's pretty much it. Let me know your thoughts, thank you, and God Bless. Ks64q3 ( talk) 17:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
(out) WP requires "reliable sources." Blogs by their nature (no editorial supervision or fact checking, no accountability) even if they are written by Saint Jude are not in the category of "reliable sources." That a lot of articles use them is unfortunate - "other stuff exists" is not a reason for adding any. Many articles, in fact, have no real sources at all, and date back five years or more. Sources which are primarily editorial in nature, written by a well-known person may be used occasionally, but the opinions need to be cited as opinion, and not as fact. If this precis is wrong, please correct me. Collect ( talk) 13:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Is the online database ebsco a reliable source? It is a subscription database so the links would lead to a log in page. My question is can ebsco articles(information found on ebsco) be used as a reference for wikipedia? Smallman12q ( talk) 23:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Could let me know if a news paper article online is a reliable source, it is being used on the Banksy article, as follows.
Hi, much of this article on Donald P. Scott is sourced from fear.org, which I suspect may not be a reliable source. What do others think? Casliber ( talk · contribs) 13:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I tend to Squidfryerchef's views, and towards this organization's acceptability or reliability, especially if it just being used as a host for material originally published elsewhere. This is a legitimate organization, as these gbooks, gscholar and gnews searches show: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Citation by books from university presses and mainstream scholarly or legal publishers therein gives evidence toward it being "regarded as trustworthy or authoritative," although of course, it has a POV which should be accounted for in writing articles. John Z ( talk) 21:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Is it appropriate to use foreign language sources in English language Wikipedia (that is French or German government sources published in French and German) for numerical information like gallons/year? Mervyn Emrys ( talk) 03:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Center against Expulsions presents (only in German version of the site) an alleged table of expulsions http://www.z-g-v.de/aktuelles/?id=58 . It's a biased synthesis of quoted sources. A part of the table is quoted in Demographic estimates of the German exodus from Eastern Europe and an editor has removed even my POV template. I doubt we need such POV here. Xx236 ( talk) 08:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC) No comments yet. Xx236 ( talk) 07:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody vet this web site for reliability, please? Thank you! — pd_THOR | =/\= | 05:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
We're having a discussion over at Talk:Deaths in 2009#Derek Benfield as to whether death announcements (not, I stress, obituaries) in newspapers are reliable sources. The question is whether the announcements are checked sufficiently by newspaper staff (so we can be reasonably sure that the named person is indeed dead) or whether the notices are essentially classified ads (prepared and published without reference to the newspaper's editorial staff). The extent to which newspapers check such facts, if at all, isn't clear. 87.114.147.43 ( talk) 22:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Is [9] Rootsweb considered a reliable source for birth/death dates and related info? Earlier tonight, I used it to cite the birth date of Playboy Playmate Diane Webber and I just wanted to verify that it's okay to use them as a source. Webber's entry at that site is noted with a V for verified. Who does that, I'm not sure. The other source for her birth date that is in the article is a Playmate listing site at Univ. of Chicago. I've emailed the maintainer of that site a couple times in the past and they say that they often get their info direct from Playboy magazine. Playboy could have had Webber's DOB incorrect. It wouldn't be the first time but it's hardly a common thing either. Anyway, is Rootsweb reliable? Thanks, Dismas| (talk) 09:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, In an AfD discussion [10], we are debating if the Daily Vault is a RS. It appears to have staff writers [11] and an editorial staff [12]. I'd call it a RS, but I tend to be fairly unconcerned the reliability of about review sites for books/movies/etc., so I figured more input would be good. Thanks! Hobit ( talk) 20:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Much easier one. Edited by Rabbi Isaac Landman. Don't know if it's the same as "Universal Jewish Encyclopedia". Question: Use freely, use with attribution, or don't use? The discussion is at Talk:Shabbat if you need it. JJB 03:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The Metal Observer is cited in multiple articles relating to performers of heavy metal music. The website's coverage of band genres is inconsistent, its content appears to be user-submitted. Most reviews that I have seen from this website do not appear to be professionally written. Can anyone confirm the reliability of this website? ( Ibaranoff24 ( talk) 23:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC))
Incorrect re: the submissions I'm afraid. Genres being "inconsistent" is purely original research, only meaningful if you have reliable sources stating this directly. Content is not user-submitted: reviews are all written by staff members, not simply users. Metal Archives is not used because it does rely on user-submitted content. As far as the professionalism of the reviews goes, it varies certainly, but no more than any review source. Even the most highly regarded here (allmusic, Rolling Stone) have examples of poorly written reviews. But poorly written or not, they are still the opinions of a staff body engaged consistently in exploring and reviewing music releases. Prophaniti ( talk) 14:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
The list of staff members can be found here so contrary to what has been said above, the site's contents are not user-submitted. -- Bardin ( talk) 11:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
As well as Bardin's excellent points regarding their history and from Blabbermouth, a few extra things to throw in: Metal Observer has come up on this noticeboard before recently (brought up by myself), and two other users affirmed it.
It mentions in the FAQ section "We are a closed society for now, at least as far as reviewers are concerned", and reviewers and their profiles can be seen here [13]. So it does have it's own staff body, and they're not accepting people to become new reviewers currently. Bardin also provided a link to what sort of thing they're asking of staff. WP:ALBUM states that a site can be used in the professional reviews section so long as it has an editorial and writing staff, be they paid or volunteer.
In addition to this, a quick look at the statistics: it currently says they have about 14,000 album reviews. With a staff of 30, that's over 450 reviews per staff member. That's a pretty significant experience of heavy metal music. Prophaniti ( talk) 21:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Where do you get hundreds apiece> Again I ask.. have you actually read the bios. Outside of the anomally of the fansite owner with over 2000 most of the volunteers on the list have less than 50. So who actually posted enough reviews to get them over 14000??? Because the sum of the people listed on the staff page doesn't add up to a number near that high... again pushing reliable source even further into the hole on this one. No metal-dedicated online webzine is a reliable source for anything. And this one is no exception. (and yes age and jobs would outweigh review amounts... if they actually had any... which they don't) The Real Libs- speak politely 00:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Can I just point out that just because their title is "staff member", doesn't make them an authority. I can start a website right now and call myself "Ruler of the Universe", but unfortunately, that doesn't make me so. Professional music journalists (note "Professional", as in, they make their living from it) could grind this site into the ground. See NME and/or Q Magazine. Now they are reliable sources. Not this stuff. Scarian Call me Pat! 23:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
It looks like just some amateur website. Dlabtot ( talk) 23:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly with Bardin: a writer does not have to be paid to be authoritative or knowledgeable. It would be fair to say that someone who is paid for it and does it for a living may well know the subject matter better, but as I say, that doesn't rule out those who aren't paid. Just look at the number of reviews: 14,000. As I say, this translates as 450 reviews per author. Over a 9 year period this averages at 50 reviews a year; which in turn means 1 heavy metal review nearly every week by every reviewer for 9 years. Obviously staff will have been hired as time passed and so on, but nevertheless, this average clearly suggests a good understanding of the subject matter. Prophaniti ( talk) 09:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
This shouldn't be necessary...
Another point to those who are worried about their age: It's irrelevant. How many posts they've made is irrelevant. How many weeks they've been is irrelevant. Prophanti: This site has its own radio show? Many sites have their own "radioshow". Q Magazine has its own TV show on cable in the UK. Just because the site has existed for a long time (apparently), does not make it more trustworthy. There are still geocities sites and yahoo sites kicking around from the mid-late nineties. And in response to "just because they're not paid" (paraphrased): It's a good indicator of their ability. If you could find the full-time professions of these "reviewers" then we can see how trustworthy and notable their reviews are. Scarian Call me Pat! 13:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I read over some of the reviews for Motorhead, as my biggest knowledge is in that area. Two articles told me they were heavy metal, one article told me they weren't and mentions that some peeps never thought they were, and would leave that discussion up to the forum boards. I couldn't find anywhere that rates them as a site in terms of have a reputation, so if someone could provide with me some links I'd be grateful. I therefore agree with Dlabtot's points that this site doesn't yet meet a number of bars of WP:RS.-- Alf melmac 10:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Just to put some boring stats on this – using Alexa page rankings comes up with the following results. Now, I know Alexa has its faults and concerns, but when comparing sites of a similar nature, it will have a fair degree of meaning. Also, this is in relation to the point that was made about MO being widely used on other websites not to make any claims as an RS (because I've already said none of these sites can make that claim).
If anyone was here to argue the "lots of people cite x as a source" point about MA, they may have had a valid argument (but still one which would be disproven). As it is MO, though, I have to say again: why? – B.hotep • talk• 09:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
The Portland Mercury, used at David Miscavige, namely this article [14]. Please post comments at Talk:David_Miscavige#RSN. Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 20:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Sources questioned:
I really need extra eyeballs on this. I stumbled over Accrediting Commission International, which suffered from many issues including potential attack page; I stubbed it per attack page policy, and immediately heard from two editors who provided a bit more sourcing, from which I carefully peeled back items that did not appear reliable or compliant with sourcing. It appears to me after initial dialog that (1) the sources are still thoroughly questionable; (2) they are now used very widely on WP for stating that accreditors are " accreditation mills", a derogatory term, based on the efforts of dedicated watchers of such "mills"; (3) this has created a longtime walled garden of support for continuance in really poor sourcing.
My data:
What do you guys think of these sources for making allegations of fraud against living persons, and for making other negative allegations upon the alleged mills? What should their own articles reflect about their expertise in this field? Is there sufficient evidence that edits in this field really need more review? Thanks.
Thanks, Jc, but your arguments are almost identical to those of the three other editors I described, right down to suggesting the possibility of shills for the mills. I was looking for other editors who could look at this from a fresh perspective who have had no prior experience with diploma mills (like myself, incidentally). Your statement "evil people" speaks for itself. Your statement of misrepresentation of Oregon is unfounded, because Oregon does make the statement I quoted and it is unclear to me what scope it has. The fact that USDE and CHEA and Bear all like each other is only one side of the story; look, the only outside reference in Bear's article is CBS, which gives him the very faint praise "who's written books on diploma mills", hardly the third-party-recognized expertise required by WP:SPS. And if a firm is criticized by the government in another way, we don't usually create categories and lists and articles of "firms criticized by governments" as if NPOV. If it's so obvious what an unaffiliated accreditor is, that should be stated clearly. The fact is that since we are talking about groups that disagree on jurisdiction (academia-government versus unaffiliated accreditors), I see no NPOV treatment possible except by stating other objective criteria. But I'm getting offtrack; the point of this request is the reliability of the sources under the policies, such as being self-published sources making derogatory claims about living persons. Thanks! JJB 19:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Stephan, and sorry! Two followups: What authorities do you see as acknowledging Levicoff as an expert? And a pay-per-view article must still be cited in its own right (not as hearsay) and quoted in talk if debatable, according to WP:V, correct? JJB 20:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess that discussion at WT:V fizzled out without agreement. So combining everyone's views, I am of opinion that Levicoff/Name It is subject to WP:SELFPUB, Bear and Degree.net are only subject to verifiability, and attribution in cases of multiple POVs, ODA is fine if quoted accurately, and hearsay needs double attribution if nobody has the PPV. I will still be looking for third-party independent testimonies of the expertise of Bear and Degree.net, which have not materialized. If Dlabtot or anyone wants to chime in too, great. JJB 03:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Interesting that JJB claims that he needs to "still be looking for third-party independent testimonies of the expertise of Bear and Degree.net." I made the following information available yesterday to JJB. John Bear has authored or co-authored 34 books (not all are distance learning or diploma mill related). Here's a few. The Chronicle of Higher Education says, John Bear, an expert on distance-learning institutions and diploma mills who is a co-author of the Bears' Guide to Earning Degrees by Distance Learning. There's probably dozens of other wp:RS articles that reference John Bear as an expert on the subject. TallMagic ( talk) 19:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody please vet this website for reliability please? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 23:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
A website called Assyrian RAF Levies is being used as a source for the Assyrians in the United Kingdom article. The site is fairly amateurish and I can't find details of its author(s), although it does contain lots of potentially useful information. What raised my concern was that it refers to a Battle of Sarande in 1945, when the battle by this name actually occured in 1940 and involved different parties. I'm therefore looking for advice on whether this is a reliable source. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm a newcomer to wikipedia.
There used to be a wikipedia page for an ISKCON Guru named Sankarshan Das Adhikari. It was created by another user, edited diligently by a few editors until Feb 25 2009, when it was deleted because 2 wikipedia editors thought there wasn't enough "notability" established. This person is not an academic researcher, so there aren't publications of that nature. The things that set him apart from other religious leaders are:
1. A practising disciple of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, founder of ISKCON 2. Pioneered Internet preaching from the year 2000 onwards, with a daily email newsletter with 10,000 unique readers, containing a thought for the day, and questions and answers 3. He answers each email from a reader himself personally 4. Has made 6 world tours and many more North America tours, at least 2 tours per year 5. Founded at least 1 new centers, helped to establish others 6. Many blogs, facebook groups, etc., exist 7. Over 70 initiated disciples and growing
A biodata is available at:
http://www.iskconpreacher.com/bio.htm
There are newspaper clippings from various language publications, and Internet sources to show what he does.
Now, how can official wikipedia-style notability be established for such a personality, who is notable in so many respects?
Also, how can the data from the existing page, before it was deleted, be recovered for backup purposes?
Any help would be appreciated. Bindumadhava ( talk) 21:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
In particular can information in the following article [16] be used in Warren National University? The discussion on Talk:Warren_National_University#WNU_was_apparently_a_bigger_joke_than_some_of_us_thought has one editor saying that the article shouldn't be used because it is a completely biased article and the person being interviewed in the article, the ex-Chief Academic Officer of WNU, is never named. I agree that it seems strange that the ex-CAO is never named but my thought is that perhaps she had a contract with WNU saying that she wouldn't be named in any articles about WNU or something. Anyway, there's some information in there that helps explain why WNU failed to get accreditation that I thought would improve the article. We appreciate any and all comments. Thanks, TallMagic ( talk) 03:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
That makes sense to me. So for example (may or may not go in the article, I just wanted to find a quick example. Here's the exact quote.
<qoute>By April, this imminently qualified and experienced academician had raised a “lot of questions” about the preparation for accreditation. Paul and a board member from California visited her and “essentially told me to shape up and get in line and do what the party line is saying or I would not be an employee.”</quote>
Here's a potential addition to the WNU article.
In a Cheyenne Herald editorial interview with the Chief Academic Officer of WNU, in April the CAO was told by the owner to reel in some of her attempted preparations for accreditation or she would not be an employee any longer.
comment? TallMagic ( talk) 04:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I came across mondaq.com being used in a BLP article. On first glance, it appears to be a legitmate legal/accounting site but a look at the about section revealed a price list (for publication) and the following:
While the testimonials section has comments such as:
Surely for our purposes, a site where editoral control consists of "please make the cheque out to.." is worthless? The site is being used in a *lot* of articles. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 01:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Clearly, mondaq.com is well outside the boundaries of what we consider a reliable source. Dlabtot ( talk) 17:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Are memoirs published by major, reputable U.S. publishing houses reliable sources? Are they only reliable if they cite sources? I wonder because I wasn't sure whether a memoir is considered fact or opinion. Maybe they are blends of both, but lean more toward opinion if they lack citations to sources? BB22030 ( talk) 13:38, 25 March 2009
Thank you for your help, Abecedare. The memoir that I refer to is "A Reporter's Life," by Walter Cronkite, published by Alfred A. Knopf in 1996. Page 223 of the memoir is quoted in the Clay T. Whitehead article. The statements cited in the Whitehead article are not about the author, Walter Cronkite, and his own life, but about Clay T. Whitehead. I checked the book out of the library to see if Mr. Cronkite referenced a newspaper article or speech for the quoted statement, but the book doesn't have footnotes or any references.
In case it is useful to you, here is the sentence in the Clay T. Whitehead article that cites to the Cronkite memoir: "With the Nixon Administration's hostility toward network TV news broadcasts growing, Whitehead suggested to affiliate stations, notoriously more conservative than national newsrooms, that they did not need to carry network news reports, and instead could rely on wire dispatches, in an attempt to reduce the influence of more liberal, critical newscasters like Walter Cronkite on the American public."
Do you think this factual sentence that cites to the Cronkite memoir is reliable if it is about someone other than Mr. Cronkite (that he seemed to dislike) and that isn't supported with independent sources?
Thanks again for your help.
Good morning. Reviewing this report I've found that chicasperuanas.com is included into the articles as a reference (see here). I wonder if this sort of site is appropiate as a reference cause IMHO is nearly a porn site with no or little information. Thanks for your attetion and best regards. -- Dferg ( w:en: - w:es:) 16:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Currently there is a debate going on in the Talk:Shibdas Ghosh whether a magazine is a reliable source to say one Shibdas Ghosh is a "Marxist Ideologist". I have almost lost interest talking to this user. Someone please look at this. 220.227.207.32 ( talk) 11:43, 27 March 2009
(UTC)
An article that I have been writing, No. 410 Squadron RCAF, is up for an A-Class review and three of the sources have been called into question, so I would like to know if they are a WP:RS. They are as follows:
TARTARUS talk 20:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
WP:V says "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Neither the author nor the book have any reputation, especially "for fact-checking and accuracy". Xx236 ( talk) 10:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
History of German settlement in Eastern Europe quotes the book extensively. I prefer not to edit this article, because User:Skäpperöd has attacked me and an another Polish editor. Xx236 ( talk) 08:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
an editor is disputing the RS status of a book book cite on Talk:1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot the book is already used as reliable source on two other wikipedia pages. this is the book..Brecher, Max (1993), A Passage to America, Bombay: Book Quest Publishers .ISBN ASIN B0000CP5CF. Can I use it as a reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Off2riorob ( talk • contribs)
The paper, Dharm P. S. Bhawuk, Culture's influence on creativity: the case of Indian spirituality, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Volume 27, Issue 1, February 2003, Pages 1-22, cites the book for some basic biographical information about Rajneesh and Tom Robbins quote on him (originally published in Seattle Post Intelligencer). What is the source being used for in the article under discussion ? Abecedare ( talk) 19:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Abecedare ( talk · contribs) that the book's writing style suggests a fringe, conspiratorial POV. Cirt ( talk) 20:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Abecedare ( talk I posted the new link that I was refering too.. quoting an alternative source for the quote..here... http://books.google.com/books?id=-Zn4k2WvKZUC&pg=PA17&dq=isbn:8120815998#PPA17,M1 have a look yourself.page 17( Off2riorob ( talk) 20:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
It is my opinion that Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh is a master of the same status as Buddha, Jesus, Lao Tzu or Pythagoras. His vision is to raise the consciousness of mankinf beyond the barbaric, biological endgame in which civilisation finds itself today, into the next stage of human evolution; from Homo sapiens to Homo nuvos ... the New Man.
He is the living embodiment of his vision; seeing him, being in his presence, one experiences some of the vast possibilities available to those who can bring their consciousness to the same peak. ...
this ....Bhagwan himself was never charged with any involvment in the conspiracy........was an early edit in this thread..does anyone disagree with it? and if you do then why? [ [26]] Bhagwan himself was never charged with any involvment in the conspiracy. ( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
that is indeed the point in question Abecedare ( talk)and I will be looking to verify comments made at that press conference...that is it..( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
this RS [27]is the book that I found to support the original book that is disputed here .( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
comment does'nt refer to the quote that I am looking at...the quote I am looking to verify is that charles turner said at a press interview ..and I quote..Turner said at a press conferance after the event that “I did not have any proof whatsoever linking Rajneesh to Sheela´s crimes" ( Off2riorob ( talk) 21:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
Are letters to the editor considered WP:reliable? In the Gilad Atzmon article, this [29] is used as a source, and quoted (debating the question of rationality of anti-semitism. I claimed that since Israel presents itself as the 'state of the Jewish people', and bearing in mind the atrocities committed by the Jewish state against the Palestinians, any form of anti-Jewish activity may be seen as political retaliation. This does not make it right.") in the article. I thought the source was not reliable, and deleted it, but then reverted myself. Any thoughts on the subject would be appreciated. Malcolm Schosha ( talk) 13:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody let me know if [30] could be considered reliable for Wikipedia. Thanks-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 11:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Roblox doesn't have a Wikipedia article, so how is that possible?-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 18:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The roblox Wikipedia article I brought to Deletion review is a new page I have been working on. The original roblox page was spam. No substance. Nothing.--
gordonrox24 (
talk) 22:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The bottom line is that nothing on Nationmaster is a reliable source for any Wikipedia article, except if there's a Nationmaster article and we source that for claims the company makes about itself. DreamGuy ( talk) 21:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
We hope to nominate Planescape: Torment at WP:FAC pretty soon, and there are concerns over the reliability of two sources: ActionTrip and RPGWatch. Some discussion over their reliability can be found at the peer review page, but some additional input would be much appreciated. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C) 21:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The issue at hand is http://www.gpradio.com.br/images/1/area/dados/institucional/documentos/t20_s_03-01-2009.pdf, a PDF document which apparently documents a study done by Crowley Broadcast Analysis for Group dos Professionales do Radio. For the sake of argument, I'll stipulate to everything: Crowley is a reputable survey firm, GPR is a reliable professional group with regard to Brazilian radio broadcasts, all of that.
Discussion at WT:Record charts#Brazilian charts has pretty much come to the conclusion that it is hard to treat it as an acceptable record chart. One editor, JuStar, has refused to acknowledge that consensus, and won't permit it to be removed.
So, my question at WP:RS: this document is a private document. It was found through one of those Google accidents ... an apparently private document, with no publicly viewable links that somehow wound up exposed to Google's search engine, and is now returned though Google searches. It's labeled Exclusivo para Group dos Professionales do Radio, which means "Exclusively for ... ". Can such documents be used for sources?— Kww( talk) 16:28, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
This non-RS seems to indicate "link:" is a sampling. Google's spider cannot find something that does not have a link to it. All it does is follow links. Whether it improperly processed a nofollow or nocache or bots.txt, I don't think we can tell. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 21:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if any of these websites were reliable: Teen Reads.com [31], Active Anime [32] and Graphic Novel Reporter.com [33]. Kaguya-chan ( talk) 20:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
In the page Shusha pogrom some Andrei Zubov is used as a reference to support the claims of the massacre, etc. The whole article has serious neutrality issues, and most sources used are completely unreliable, such as law schools, obscure politologists, etc. However Zubov is claimed to be a historian, but the analysis of the source shows that he is absolutely clueless about what happened in the Caucasus at the time. This is the original Russian text:
Британская администрация почему-то передала населенные армянами уезды Елизаветпольской губернии под юрисдикцию Азербайджана. Британский администратор Карабаха полковник Шательворт не препятствовал притеснениям армян, чинимым татарской администрацией губернатора Салтанова. Межнациональные трения завершились страшной резней, в которой погибла большая часть армян города Шуши. Бакинский парламент отказался даже осудить свершителей Шушинской резни, и в Карабахе вспыхнула война. Англичане пытались разъединить армянские и азербайджанские войска. Когда же они ушли из региона, азербайджанская армия была в начале ноября 1919 года полностью разгромлена армянами. Только вмешательство англичан смогло предотвратить поход армянских войск на Елизаветполь и Шемаху. [36]
Translation:
For some reason the British administration placed the Armenian populated uyezds of Elizavetpol gubernia under the Azerbaijani jurisdiction. The British administrator of Karabakh colonel Shuttleworth did not prevent the discrimination of Armenians by the Tatar administration of governor Sultanov. Interethnic tensions resulted in a horrible massacre, in which most Armenians in the town of Shusha perished. Baku parliament refused even to condemn the perpetrators of the Shusha massacre, and the war started in Karabakh. English tried to interfere between the Armenian and Azerbaijani troops, but when they left the region, the Azerbaijani army was completely defeated by the Armenians in early November 1919. Only the interference of the English prevented the march of the Armenian troops to Elizavetpol and Shemakha.
As one could see, this guy has no idea about what actually happened in the region, and when exactly. According to all sources, even those quoted in the article the fighting in Shusha took place in March 1920, when Azerbaijanis celebrated Novruz (precisely, on 22 - 26 March 1920). Zubov says that the fighting between Armenians and Azerbaijanis started after the "massacre" in Shusha, and as result of that the Azerbaijanis were defeated in November 1919, i.e. according to him the "massacre" in Shusha was in 1919, not in 1920. Moreover, he says that the British interfered to prevent the Armenian offensive towards Ganja, while in fact the British left Azerbaijan in August 1919. See for instance these sources:
While the Italians (wisely) never got involved in the Caucasus, the continuing pressure of demobilisation and calls for British troops in other places, forced withdrawals from the region. At the end of August, Baku and the Caspian naval personnel were evacuated. By about mid-October 1919 the only troops remaining in the Caucasus were three infantry battalions at Batum.
Keith Jeffery. Field Marshal Sir Henry Wilson: a political soldier. Oxford University Press, 2006ISBN 0198203586, 9780198203582, p 247
However, the British withdrew from Baku and Azerbaijan in August 1919, and the Soviets took over the Azerbaijan Republic in April 1920.
Andy Stern. Who won the oil wars? Collins & Brown, 2005 ISBN 1843402912, 9781843402916
Zubov has no idea what he is talking about. He does not know the basic facts, such as the date of the events in Shusha, the date when the British army left the region, etc. In my opinion, Zubov cannot be considered a reliable source on the topic of events in Shusha in 1920. Grand master 11:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Is Men's News Daily sufficiently reliable, for either facts or opinions, to be used in articles like Separatist feminism, Lev Navrozov, David Holcberg, Antifeminism, Andrea Dworkin, etc. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 20:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
There's some major problems rearing up on X-American articles. The population boxes are adding dubious representatives, some WP:BLP, of that ethnic group. Dutch Americans places Franklin Roosevelt and Martin van Buren, as, apparently, pristine representatives of Dutch Americans, though neither have been proven to have any more than a great-grandparent of that ancestry (in fact, for Van Buren, it's "great-great-great-great-grandfather Cornelis") - and neither have sources providing them as "Dutch Americans" merely of "some Dutch background." I think intervention will eventually be needed as many editors are incredibly hot-headed about their ethnicities' "known names." Bulldog123 16:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Re: Principality of Paganija & De Administrator Imperio
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to bring (the English Version) of Wikipedia’s Editors attention to some of the historical information on its web site. It concerns the former coastal Principality of Paganija in today's modern Croatia. As I am not a qualified history scholar I shall present my facts as clearly as possible.
Historical facts are being presented here which appear to be formulated using unscientific methods. One can only interpret this as to be politically motivated. The article states that the peoples of the former Medieval State of Paganija are of Serbian descent by using the "De Administrator Imperio" written by Roman Emperor Constantine VII Progenitors (Byzantine Empire), as it's only reference point. This statement contradicts the ethnic demographics of that region that as it exists today. The writers have not bothered to explain why this is the case! From a scholarly perspective the "De Administrator Imperio" cannot be used as source of factual information as it also has contradictions within its own paragraphs.This makes De Administrator Imperio a questionable source of historic information about this region.
There are two chapters telling two different versions of the arrival of Croatians to the region. The sections about the arrival of Serbs are nearly identical to one of stories telling the arrival of Croatians. The chapters read as an ancient form of rewrite of the migration pattern of same peoples (as if the author lacked historical information). Chapters also use mythic Croatian narratives as fact! Also De Administrator Imperio is describing events that took place three centuries before it was written. With this in mind, information in De Administrator Imperio concerning the Principality of Paganija can be put in serious doubt.Why haven't secondary references been represented, such as the historical perspectives from the other Chronicles written in that period? The Chronicle De Regno Sclavorum from 753 is a good example. This document makes more sense as it was written within that period of history and it confirms the ethnic demography of that area. The De Regno Sclavorum is believed to have been written at the congress of Southern Slavs in the Bosnian town of Dalmae (today’s Duvno). Noted famous historian J.B Bury has expressed problems with certain paragraphs of "De Administrator Imperio" this can all be referenced easily.
Secondly when talking about certain facts concerning the demography of that region of Damatia(Croatia), Wikipedia’s historical article on Paganija makes a mockery of everyday life as we know it. They misrepresent the ethnic origins of the people who live in this region. The facts of who really makes up the population of the area can be gained from an examination of several sources. For example:
(a) The recent Croatian census that was conducted in the region. (b) The Austro-Hungarian census compiled in the 19th century. (c) The recorded and documented Croatian History of the peoples of the “Republic of Ragusa”, which is now called Dubrovnik. Dubrovnik is just south of the old Medieval State of Paganija. The unreliable sources used by Wikipedia would make them of Serbian descent. Croatian literature from Dubrovnik (Republic of Ragusa) goes back centuries (reference is drawn to their long established history archives located in their libraries). Writers from Dubrovnik have a long established history of interaction with their peers from the Venetian Republic and Europe. This is a well established fact both in Dalmatia and in the rest of Croatia.
(d) There are Croatian costumes and folkloric dances that have been passed down for centuries from one generation to another. These dances are still actively performed today. (e) People who migrated from that region that I know refer to themselves as Croatian or of Croatian descent. (f) All the towns and councils of this region state on their web sites that they are Croatians.
These are just some of the facts that are known and it’s just the tip of the iceberg. With all that is stated above "De Administrator Imperio" just does not make any sense! There is always the possibility that this misleading information can be used in the future as a propaganda weapon. One can only recall the recent former Yugoslavian Wars and how much pain, misery and death it brought.
I have researched the “www.britannica.com Dalmatia Region Croatia web site (this is a more updated version) and they do not mention “De Administrator Imperio Chronicles” as an historical reference for the Dalmatian Region. This omission is obviously due to the fact that this reference is considered contradictory and therefore unreliable for that region. Maybe Wikpedia could consider adopting the same approach as www.britanica.com.
Due to the very nature of the Internet and its growing power in presenting information to society, I sincerely ask that Wikipedia look into my concerns.
Sincerely
123.2.59.195 (
talk) 10:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to join up and join in the effort Unomi ( talk) 12:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
We would consider an academic peer reviewed journal as a Reliable Source for an article about a topic. How far can we take the same journal as reliable in describing iteslf? If it says on the title page that it was published in 1957, can we take that as true, or are we obliged to find another publication that verifies it? Martinlc ( talk) 13:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure where to put this question, but I'll give it a try here. I'm trying to add a relevant video for the external links portion of the Chemtrail conspiracy theory. Would the following video be considered reliable(would it fit into the external links section).
Smallman12q ( talk) 21:19, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
The first talking head starts by talking about cloud seeding, not chemtrails. Not a good start, but as she continues the evidence presented is secondhand hearsay, "I was told initially by a friend, he said his brother was in the military service..." (0:29).
The second talking head (1:02) is probably just confused, but he doesn't explain himself well enough to know how to refute it. It sounds like he's describing someone looking from the ground up at contrails from airlines and military aircraft "in the same airspace" and comparing the residence time of the contrails. What does "in the same airspace" mean? If it means they were in the same field of view while looking up from the ground (that was my interpretation), it tells us nothing about the altitude of the aircraft. And from the ground, and only seeing the contrails, it's difficult to tell the difference between an aircraft at 30,000 ft and 45,000 ft. As I said, it's entirely too vague in the video to tell what he's specifically talking about. Even if he did see military contrails persisting for longer than civilian contrails, there are plenty of accepted scientific reasons for them. The military aircraft could be flying at an altitude where the air is closer to saturation, which would mean the contrails would persist for longer.
The third segment is a guy saying he saw two suspicious contrails from KC-135s while touring a civilian air traffic control tower. They were "identified" as military aircraft, but says he didn't see them, only their contrails, and their radio callsigns were identified as Petrol 1 and Petrol 2. If the aircraft were not visible from the air traffic control tower were not visible, they were not on the tower frequency or in the tower's airspace. The information presented that he saw this while visiting a control tower is a red herring to make the viewer think they were flying at a low altitude. However, he didn't see them, this means they could be flying at any altitude, including high enough to make normal contrails.
In addition to the information presented in the video being unverifiable, it is also not presented in a neutral point of view. All three of the talking heads were convinced that chemtrails exist and that it's a military conspiracy. But there was no alternative evidence presented attempting to rebut the claims, which is actually quite easy to do. There may have been in the original Discovery Channel episode, but the clip provided is only 2 minutes long, and ends abruptly after the third talking head gets done. While ELs are not required to be NPOV, the addition of this link would be placing undue weight on the side that advocates "the truth" of the conspiracy theory.
TLDR summary: the information presented in the video is factually inaccurate, unverifiable, and not NPOV and as such should not be included as external links. - Atmoz ( talk) 04:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
The layout of this webpage appears to be in a blog-style format - but it is the official website of the publisher AbeBooks. Reliable source for information on what books were bestsellers from the AbeBooks publisher itself? Cirt ( talk) 17:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Could someone take a look at Talk:Siena_College and perhaps offer opinions? It's a lengthy, very lame discussion about the location of the college. I have a dog in the fight, so I'm probably not the best person to summarise. As far as I can tell, published sources, and the college, overwhelmingly say "Siena is in Loudonville" but there are a few editors who feel that maps show that it is probably in nearby Newtonville. IMO, an editor's interpretation of a map which does not show clear boundaries is not a reliable source. I'd be grateful for any input. Thanks. -- hippo43 ( talk) 22:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree that reading a map is not original research. Maps are used as references in multiple FA articles on roads and highways. Should we then start deleting those references and their info from Featured Articles some of which are primarily edited by admins? A map was one of the main arguments for keeping North River (Hudson River) instead of merging it with Hudson River. A map was used as definitive proof for keeping out Mapinfo as a "company in Troy, New York" due to the map showing that it wasnt in Troy even though its ZIP code is, it politically was in a neighboring town. In multiple discussions hippo refuses to accept any commonsense such as that above, claiming OR and all that. There were three or four sources for Newtonville when I first put it in. They werent "reliable", they are however more reliable than anything hippo has come up with. Siena College has a conflict of interest in saying Loudonville (read my rants on the talk page of the article). As for ZIP code that someone here mentioned- the official USPS city name for that ZIP code is Albany, NOT Loudonville, Loudonville is only one of two other alternative names (the other being Siena, which isnt even a hamlet). The town hall of the town of Colonie is directly across from the campus and the town says its address is Newtonville. The Newtonville PO does not do home delivery only PO boxes that is why the college must use the ZIP code it does. Hippo doesnt wish to discuss hamlets or anything but "the college says its in Loudonville". I'm sorry this is so long, I'm trying to catch everyone up on our point of view on why Loudonville alone is not acceptable. As for those asking for an older map, see Colonie, New York, the name Newtonville goes right over where Siena College is today on the 1866 map on that article, Loudonville is considerably farther south. Camelbinky ( talk) 02:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you squidfryerchef, I suppose your right about that. Hippo- are you really saying a poetry book, and a book on the Italian American Experience are authoritative on where Siena College is? Reliable verifiable sources are not just about them being good/bad overall, its about their relevance. Those sources you put have no relevance or research into where the college is. Siena College has a conflict of interest, their website is not useable you can not say they arent using Loudonville simply because it is an acceptable alternative for their ZIP code, they can say they are in the city of Albany and legitimately use that as their mailing address, it doesnt make them in Albany. But of course if they did we'd still have this argument and you'd insist we'd have to list the campus as being in Albany. Am I wrong? If I am right then your argument loses water, so tell me how it and your opinion would be different if they had substituted Albany for Loudonville on everything. Because there is nothing stopping the college from doing that any time. It is not an unlikely or hypothetical question, there is no reason it couldnt happen. A blog while not reliable shows that there are local people who believe that the campus could be in Newtonville, you (I believe) are in Texas how would you know what the locals consider the campus to be in? But that doesnt matter to you of course. It does to those of us who are locals, those that care about this article and articles of the area and want them to be factually correct. You have now started an edit war on Loudonville, New York saying that the hamlet is actually a town and have been warned by multiple editors to stop editing in face of concensus. Camelbinky ( talk) 21:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Somebody keeps inserting into Kaitsepolitseiamet, article on the Estonian Defence Police, claims taken from the personal blog of one Risto Teinonen, a noted neo-Nazi. Can such a blog be considered a WP:RS for claims such as "KAPO appears to be a criminal civil service"? Can insertion of such material be considered vandalism? Διγουρεν Εμπρος! 18:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
is www.rapbasement.com a suitable reference for an album's track listing? i dont think so but other users on the page Fantasy Ride do think so. ( Lil-unique1 ( talk) 19:30, 4 April 2009 (UTC))
I was helping out with editing on the article System of a Down, and I wanted to check the reliability of a few sources that are cited in the article:
Are these any good at all? The Rock City News link looks somewhat unprofessional and I have no idea what authority/notability Hard Radio/Shockwaves Online and Musicmight hold. ( Ibaranoff24 ( talk) 03:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC))
Is this a reliable source. yousaf465'
Thanks,yes it was the book review I was referring to.-- yousaf465' 16:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I'm wondering about this edit, and what people think about using commercial sites to verify the existence and other details about some liqueurs on the list for which we have no other independently verifiable information. The discussion at the talk page has seemed to come down to a question of whether it's appropriate to use a commercial site to verify something when no non-commercial site can be found.
Thanks in advance for any input, either here, or at Talk:List of liqueurs. - GTBacchus( talk) 22:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Is www.city-data.com a reliable source for demographic and other city data? I thought I had seen that it was not but I cannot locate any discussion on the topic. Thanks, Alanraywiki ( talk) 23:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
OK, I've looked at all kinds of sources and they seem to be zeroing in on something. The short answer is, if we allowed original research here, and it was my job to draw the border between Loudonville and Newtonville, the northern boundary of Siena campus would be the border. I'll go through them here.
1. The college uses the address of Loudonville. Google Books shows it was considered in Loudonville since its founding in the 1930s. Every mention of the college's address in print or on the web ( except for WP and some pages quoting the WP ) show Loudonville or Colonie, not Newtonville.
2. Maps. We've looked at several maps, from Mapquest, Google Earth, the US Geological Survey, and a historic map from 1866. None of them place a border around Newtonville or Loudonville. Some of them shade in an area above the college and mark it Newtonville, or they label the post office, or they label the Loudon/Maxwell crossroads as Newtonville, but none of them mark the campus itself as being in either hamlet.
However, there is at least one outlier. Yahoo Maps puts the dot for Newtonville right at the entrance to campus. I don't know why it does this ( it's not interpolating the address of the post office ) but I still think the other maps, especially the ones not generated by computer, take precedence. Is an online-generated map an RS at that level of detail?
3. Post offices. The Newtonville PO shares ZIP code 12110 with Latham, the hamlet just to the north. The streets that are clearly in Newtonville also use 12110. Siena on the other hand uses 12211 for its own post office, which it shares with an Albany PO. The streets that are clearly in Loudonville use 12211; there is no physical Loudonville post office, but Loudonville is an acceptable city name.
4. Neighbors. The Schuyler Meadows Country Club just next door, [39] and which extends a little further to the north, also uses a Loudonville address.
5. Delivery addresses. While ZIP codes are defined by streets and addresses and not by zones on a map, in all but the most rural areas they generally do form boundaries. The streets just above the campus, Fiddler's Ln, Cherrywood Ter, and Middlefield Dr, use Newtonville 12110 according to the USPS address lookup. Private roads in the area belonging to the college don't appear in the database.
The campus, at 515 Loudon Rd, uses Loudonville 12211. Across the street, the NYSP facility at #504 also uses Loudonville. Campus View Drive, across from the college's Friars Rd entrance, uses Loudonville. The town hall at #534, across from the northern border of campus, uses Newtonville. At #552 is the Newtonville Post Office.
This all hints at a boundary around 530, right at the edge of campus.
6. Real estate. A local Realtor's description, which I would consider an expert SPS, has Newtonville is not an incorporated town, but rather a loosely defined area--a neighborhood really--beside the also nebulous Loudonville, both of which lie within the town of Colonie. Roughly speaking, Newtonville runs along Route 9 from Siena College to Hoffman's Playland, taking in part of Maxwell Road to the west and over to Fiddlers Lane to the east of Route 9. Loudonville lies to the south of Newtonville.
I'm reading "from Siena College" as exclusive. Again, I would draw the border right at the north edge of campus. It might zigzag a hundred yards on the even side of the road to get all of the town hall parking lot, but that's what the sources say.
8. Zoning. The zoning map for Colonie [40] doesn't show a border. Loudonville and most of Newtonville are zoned single family residential. There is a narrow historic overlay zone along Loudon Rd as far as Maxwell, but that's simply where the old mansions are, as opposed to the shopping plazas to the north, not a neighborhood border.
9. The phone company. Telephone numbers seem to change from a 78X office code to a 43X prefix somewhere further south of where the post office splits the addresses. Newtonville addresses have phone numbers that start with 783, 786, 713. So does the college. Most other Loudonville addresses have phone numbers that start with 432, 434, 435. But I wouldn't make too much of this; a NXX lookup simply shows 783 as Colonie and 432 as Albany. Not Loudonville or Newtonville.
10. So the written sources overwhelmingly say Loudonville, ranging from books, university materials, self-published materials, and collection of postal data. The maps show that Newtonville is close by but none of them has a border. While it's tempting to cluster the campus with the adjacent Newtonville, especially when it is separated from the rest of Loudonville by wide-open areas, that would be original guesswork. In addition the USGS map shows a creek bed above the campus which could very well have been a natural and ancient border. The Yahoo map may not be RS for such fine detail. The zoning map didnt have relevant information, and the telephone city codes dont mention Newtonville or Loudonville.
11. The article should however mention Newtonville. We've run into an odd duck here; the campus is on the outskirts of the larger hamlet L, but almost across the street is the village center of the tiny hamlet of N. Some people visiting campus are going to see Newtonville on their online maps or GPS and wonder if theyre in the right place, and those touring the area on mountain bike will see Newtonville on their topo maps. It would be appropriate to mention, in a description of the campus, that it's close to the Newtonville Post Office and Newton Plaza, in the same context we might mention the country club and cemetery on the other side of campus.
12. We should word it carefully to avoid a false compromise like "Siena is near Newtonville but has a Loudonville mailing address". Its neighbors to the west, east, and south also use a Loudonville mailing address, because theyre all on the edge of Loudonville. Making an issue of the address would make sense if the college were in Troy, but it isn't. Squidfryerchef ( talk) 16:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
There is more I can have issue with but will address what I need to go over with for now- go to Mapquest and ask for a map of the college's address as listed by hippo, with Loudonville as he insists. It wont come up with anything. Try it with Newtonville. It then shows up. So I dont know how you came up with that online maps crap shows it to be in Loudonville and that there is no dispute, this just adds one more piece of circumstantial evidence that shows there is a dispute. It's neighbors to the west DONT use Loudonville, the Colonie Memorial Town Hall uses Newtonville, those to the north on Fiddlers Lane use Latham (and USPS gives them the option of using Newtonville). Its really hard to call much of what you said "original research as some of it is "original make-up crap" really no disrespect, I dont mean you are lying or intentionally distorting facts, there just isnt any research that you did you do to even think that the "creek bed" could be the ancient boundary. It's not. I'm sorry if this is considered "more OR" or my opinion, but I am considered by some to be an expert on the geography and history of the CD, I've seriously been reading, researching, and studying the history and geography of this area that I LOVE soo much, and really to have outsiders come in and while well-meaning slow down progress, I had someone tag as "suspicious" the assertion in the Albany, NY article that Albany was the fourth oldest city in the US, the second oldest state capital city, and oldest surviving settlement of the 13 colonies, it wasnt (like almost all the article at that time, it was pretty slim on citations I admit) but it slowed down progress that had just started building on upgrading the article by having a suspicious tag.(the Siena College article hasnt been ruined I'm not saying that, but it has happened elsewhere, not just to me but to other editors pride and joy geo & hist related articles by well-meaning good-faith edits that gut content or add false info). Btw- we use the old Dutch word kill in Albany, generally creek is from non-natives and some map makers who dont realize kill already means creek, such as mapmakers putting Normanskill Creek instead of Normans Kill as DOT signs say on the bridges; just one of those oddities that show non-natives should do their due diligence and respect natives when they mention these things, I would and have done the same for others in articles others know more about. I'm sorry if I go off on tangents and make my arguments long, I know hippo throws a fit about that. To be honest I have a disorder on the autism spectrum (asperger's syndrome) and disorders normally associated with those that have autism. I hope hippo understands its not that I'm being rude or whatever he has been thinking everytime he calls me out for typing so much I consider it him being rude, but at least I understand that he didnt know, but now you do. Camelbinky ( talk) 21:31, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I would like to point out about the 1866 map, the comment that the Newtonville Post Office was labelled on the map but not the village, the same can be said of Cohoes, which in the 1840s became an incorporated village of the town but on that map is named only by Cohoes P.O.. To the other comment on the ultimate authority of what constitutes Newtonville is the boundary of the land that John M. Newton purchased; then also the same can be said of Loudonville constituting the original Ireland's Corners in which case Siena college is in neither hamlet but instead is in farm countryside between the two and can best be described as being in Loudonville's ZIP code as you have well demonstrated. Does any of this help? 24.182.142.254 ( talk) 06:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
The 1866 map mentions both Loudonville and Irelands Corner P.O., does that matter at all? Are we sure they are the same thing? Why was the post office expanded and the name changed to Loudonville in 1871, when the map shows that Loudonville was a name in use prior to the post office using that name.
On Sathya Sai Baba (an article which could stand more eyeballs), there is a currently a dispute about whether Dale Beyerstein and Basava Premananda are reliable sources. Radiantenergy ( talk · contribs) argues here that they are not reliable, while White adept ( talk · contribs) disagrees. What do others think? ← Spidern → 18:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Just to clarify: The source in question is this paper: http://www.bcskeptics.info/resources/papers/saibaba by Prof. Dale Beyerstein. This is perhaps the most comprehensive study of all available on the topic of the purported miracles. In that particular section of the article, this was perhaps the only academic source and, I feel, it is one of the best and most comprehensive, in comparison to other sources available on the topic. If you see the talk - besides me at least two other editors have pointed out this source as being insightful. In another user's words [43] :"Honestly, I enjoy the bc skeptic http://www.bcskeptics.info/resources/papers/saibaba/ as far more interesting reading, because at least he quotes the material sources, which I really need to do some digging to verify". User:Ombudswiki had also suggested it as an academic source. White adept ( talk) 19:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Vegetation and slope stability is suffering major mutilationat the hands of User:Radhakrishnansk who is obviously a sock of banned User:Suciindia who in turn socked under the cloak of User:Sekharlk (who claimed his name to be Sekhar Lukose Kuriakose [44] and it is more than mere coincidence that one of the articles our User:Radhakrishnansk has cited bears the names of Kuriakose S.L (See the second ref. in Vegetation and slope stability). The real person behind these socks had only two areas of interest. One is a minor Indian political party Socialist Unity Centre of India and its many related articles and a bit of geography. See this also.
This cu case also is a pointer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Suciindia The guy who probably hails from Kerala learnt a bit of geography from ITC Enschede the IP of which is [ [45]]. If you check the contributions of that IP [46] it is evident that the person behind these socks was there. The disturbing thing is that this guy has not learnt the way WP works and through socking and reverting is trying to push his pov, self promotion etc. On Talk:Vegetation and slope stability he makes some funny exhortations:
Dear editors, this article necessitates considerable editing. The content is excellent and factual. I will attempt to do it in the coming days, but I request more able editors to reduce the essay like nature of this article.--Radhakrishnansk (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
It looks like his purpose is to re-write the article inserting his pov and his own sources. This is the home page of the guy and the strange admixture in the hall of fame (Stalin and Che among scientists and poets) reflects the sort of person who is behind the socks. Talk:Shibdas Ghosh has some discussions related to this guy's attempt to push through non-RS. Uzhuthiran ( talk) 18:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Someone has questioned Store norske leksikon as a reliable source, saying that almost anyone can edit it. [47] I have read some of what it says about itself and have been accepting it as reliable. [48] Since it is used as a source for a great many interesting articles on Norwegian subjects on Wikipedia, I would like to be sure of its reliability. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 20:29, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, could podcasts be considered reliable sources depending on where they're from. As there are lots of podcasts on the Stratfor website, which is a reliable website. Could podcasts from reliable websites be used? Deavenger ( talk) 22:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Depends for what. Shiite history? Rock solid reliable. As a citation for a matter of recent fact? Never reliable. For an opinion? Sometimes, depending on due weight and how close to his area of expertise the matter is. Bali ultimate ( talk) 22:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Appointments and awards Cole was awarded Fulbright-Hays fellowships to India (1982) and to Egypt (1985-1986). From 1999 until 2004, Juan Cole was the editor of The International Journal of Middle East Studies. He has served in professional offices for the American Institute of Iranian Studies.[4] He was elected president of the Middle East Studies Association of North America in November 2004.[5] In 2006, he received the James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism administered by Hunter College.[6]
1975 B.A. History and Literature of Religions, Northwestern University 1978 M.A. Arabic Studies/History, American University in Cairo 1984 Ph.D. Islamic Studies, University of California Los Angeles 1984-1990 Assistant Professor of History, University of Michigan 1990-1995 Associate Professor of History, University of Michigan 1992-1995 Director, Center for Middle Eastern and North African Studies, University of Michigan 1995- Professor of History, University of Michigan
The blog has won various awards; as of April 2006 the most prominent is the 2005 James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism from Hunter College.[23] It has also received two 2004 Koufax Awards: the "Best Expert Blog" and the "Best Blog Post".[24] It has since dropped off the list, but Informed Comment has been ranked as the 99th most popular blog on the Internet by Technorati on October 21, 2006.[25]
Cole has been cited in the press as a Middle East expert several times since 1990.[19] However, he was considered obscure outside his field prior to 2002, when he began publishing his weblog.[20] From 2002 onwards, Cole has been an active commentator in the UK and US media on topics related to the Middle East. His focus has primarily been Iraq, Iran, The Palestinian Authority, and Israel. He has published op-eds on the Mideast at the Washington Post, Le Monde Diplomatique, The Guardian, the San Jose Mercury News, the San Francisco Chronicle, The Boston Review, The Nation, the Daily Star, Tikkun magazine as well as at Salon.com, where he is a frequent contributor.[21] He has appeared on the PBS Lehrer News Hour, Nightline, ABC Evening News, the Today Show, Anderson Cooper 360°, Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, Al Jazeera and CNN Headline News.[22]
Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.
Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.