Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 704:
::::::I deeply respect WaPo for this GitHub project and, while I've only skimmed the front page of the corresponding blog, I'm amazed at the sort of infrastructure they're sharing with the general public. [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 19:53, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
:::::::Useful incorporation of that raw data into a citation for article use would often border on [[wp:OR|OR]], wouldn't it? [[User:GenQuest|<span style="color:Purple; text-shadow:brown 0.1em 0.2em 0.1em;"><i>G</i>en<i>Q</i>uest</span>]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:GenQuest|<span style="color:Purple; text-shadow:brown 0.1em 0.2em 0.1em;">"scribble"</span>]]</sup></small> 20:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
::::::::IMO using raw data can be OR-compliant if used for very discrete pieces of information, like buildings' heights, stock market prices, population stats... The moment it begins to be incorporated in a broader "narrative", I agree that it will often be problematic. [[User:JBchrch|<span style="color:#494e52">'''JBchrch'''</span>]] [[User_talk:JBchrch|<span style="color:#494e52">talk</span>]] 21:11, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
:::It's a historical survey, however basic, so it depends what the article editors' consensus feels is the standard for publication -- if that's academic peer review, then WaPo editors and fact checkers might not meet that standard (for 1619, they brought in at least one fact checker from academia). The next few comments don't seem reasonable considering it is an account under WaPo's name and the dataset page lists the linked story, the primary journalist, and the methodology. I cannot see any scenario in which that's possible without editorial oversight. The comparison to a journalist's social media post is interesting, if we accept it at face-value, since journalists are held to very high (arguably unreasonably high) [https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/social-media-newsroom-policies-responses.php ethical policies on social media] by major outlets. [[User:SamuelRiv|SamuelRiv]] ([[User talk:SamuelRiv|talk]]) 15:57, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
:I would like to note that I'm not sure we got to consensus here, but assuming that others feel we did, @[[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]], I would have preferred if you hadn't gone through and just deleted the source in all the articles instead of replacing it with the article. Now I have to go through a lot of these and revert a whole change rather than just editing in a different citation.
| |||