Revision as of 04:23, 10 February 2008 editYosemitesam25 (talk | contribs)406 edits →Reliable secondary sources← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:47, 10 February 2008 edit undoViriditas (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers169,781 edits →Reliable secondary sources: +Next edit → | ||
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
Secondly, your idea that "we don't use the lead section in this way" is wholly subjective. In fact, the reference is germaine to the question of reparations, which is presented in the lead section as a foregone conclusion even though the congress settled the issue long ago. | Secondly, your idea that "we don't use the lead section in this way" is wholly subjective. In fact, the reference is germaine to the question of reparations, which is presented in the lead section as a foregone conclusion even though the congress settled the issue long ago. | ||
Finally, you call for a developing a "sourced section that directly discusses the Hawaiian sovereignty movement in relation to the point you are trying to make". That requirement was met when I added critical quotations from Rice to the pre-existing section entitled "backlash". You deleted that and you also deleted the link I added to the decision itself. --] (]) 04:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC) | Finally, you call for a developing a "sourced section that directly discusses the Hawaiian sovereignty movement in relation to the point you are trying to make". That requirement was met when I added critical quotations from Rice to the pre-existing section entitled "backlash". You deleted that and you also deleted the link I added to the decision itself. --] (]) 04:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
:No, I'm sorry, you have not offered any secondary sources, nor do we interpert primary sources in controversial articles the way you using them; you need to use inline citations to secondary sources that expressly discuss the movement in relation to the points you wish to raise. What you have done at this point, is add original research to the article, which is not acceptable according to Misplaced Pages policy. Please review ]. —] | ] 04:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
==3RR== | |||
] | |||
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly{{#if:|, as you are doing at ]}}. If you continue, you may be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for ], even if they do not technically violate the ]. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.<!-- Template:3RR --> —] | ] 04:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:47, 10 February 2008
|
January 2008
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to List of climbers, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. This is especially important when dealing with biographies of living people, but applies to all Misplaced Pages articles. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Misplaced Pages:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add your reference to the article. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 02:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Reliable secondary sources
Please provide reliable secondary sources for your POV edits to Hawaiian sovereignty movement. Your user account appears to be used only to add unsourced POV to the article. —Viriditas | Talk 02:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- The reference to the Grassroot Institute that you provided is a selective interpretation of a primary source document (Native Hawaiians Study Commission Report). I encourage you to review Misplaced Pages's sourcing guidelines and to use secondary sources to support primary source interpretations. The easiest way to do this is to attribute opinions to reliable authors and publications. Even so, we do not use the lead section in the way that you are using it, as it represents a summary of the article, not a POV. To add this POV to the article, you will need to develop a sourced section that directly discusses the Hawaiian sovereignty movement in relation to the point you are trying to make. Selectively choosing items from a primary source document to represent your personal opinion is original research and is not allowed. —Viriditas | Talk 02:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please do not continue to ignore my requests for secondary sources. We simply do not interpret primary sources, especially in controversial articles where secondary sources are key. —Viriditas | Talk 03:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments. I am new to Misplaced Pages and am in need of help with respect to the issues raised. As I understand it, your request is for a secondary source, which ought to be a reliable publication. At the same time, you reject the reference to the Grassroot Institute as a secondary source, even though 1) It is a reliable publication 2) It provides the full text of the original Native Hawaiian Study Commission report. Secondly, your idea that "we don't use the lead section in this way" is wholly subjective. In fact, the reference is germaine to the question of reparations, which is presented in the lead section as a foregone conclusion even though the congress settled the issue long ago. Finally, you call for a developing a "sourced section that directly discusses the Hawaiian sovereignty movement in relation to the point you are trying to make". That requirement was met when I added critical quotations from Rice to the pre-existing section entitled "backlash". You deleted that and you also deleted the link I added to the decision itself. --Yosemitesam25 (talk) 04:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- No, I'm sorry, you have not offered any secondary sources, nor do we interpert primary sources in controversial articles the way you using them; you need to use inline citations to secondary sources that expressly discuss the movement in relation to the points you wish to raise. What you have done at this point, is add original research to the article, which is not acceptable according to Misplaced Pages policy. Please review WP:OR. —Viriditas | Talk 04:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
3RR
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. —Viriditas | Talk 04:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)