| Revision as of 18:25, 17 August 2009 editDlabtot (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,760 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:49, 19 August 2009 edit undoImalbornoz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,017 edits →If a source says that (...): new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| ---- | ---- | ||
| | | ||
| == If a source says that (...) == | |||
| Sorry the disruption, but I saw your comment in the RS Noticeboard in the section, and I have a doubt. | |||
| We are having a dispute, and part of that dispute is 1) how to cite sources so that they are reliable in supporting what the article says and 2) which sources to use. I agree that the RSN is not a place to solve disputes, but it is a place to solve some of our doubts regarding those questions, isn't it? | |||
| You will see that Blueboar later said that the lead policy had changed and citations in the lead the same as everywhere else. If you have the time, I would like to know if you think that this question was proper for the RS Noticeboard: | |||
| :"Is it all right to use | |||
| :*a source that says "Gibraltar is self-governing in all matters except defence" (Encyclopaedia Brittanica) | |||
| :*or a source that says "Gibraltar is self-governing in all matters except defence, foreign affairs, internal security and public service" (UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office) | |||
| :as a citation for "Gibraltar is a self-governing British overseas territory" without any further explanation until 160 lines later?" | |||
| Also, if you have the time and interest, I would very much appreciate if you could tell me what your answer to that question would be. | |||
| Thank you very much and sorry for the disruption again. --] (]) 08:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:49, 19 August 2009
You may leave messages for me here.
After I read your message, I will delete it.
If I reply, I will do so on your talk page.
If you wish to discuss a particular article, please do so on that article's talk page.
If a source says that (...)
Sorry the disruption, but I saw your comment in the RS Noticeboard in the "If a source says that (....)" section, and I have a doubt.
We are having a dispute, and part of that dispute is 1) how to cite sources so that they are reliable in supporting what the article says and 2) which sources to use. I agree that the RSN is not a place to solve disputes, but it is a place to solve some of our doubts regarding those questions, isn't it?
You will see that Blueboar later said that the lead policy had changed and citations are recommended in the lead the same as everywhere else. If you have the time, I would like to know if you think that this question was proper for the RS Noticeboard:
- "Is it all right to use
- a source that says "Gibraltar is self-governing in all matters except defence" (Encyclopaedia Brittanica)
- or a source that says "Gibraltar is self-governing in all matters except defence, foreign affairs, internal security and public service" (UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office)
- as a citation for "Gibraltar is a self-governing British overseas territory" without any further explanation until 160 lines later?"
Also, if you have the time and interest, I would very much appreciate if you could tell me what your answer to that question would be.
Thank you very much and sorry for the disruption again. --Imalbornoz (talk) 08:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)