Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Joel Gilbert"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>BlueMoonset
(second opinion)
imported>BlueMoonset
(needs action by nominator)
Line 28: Line 28:
 
::::*Well... "extreme and marginal" as [[Jerome Corsi|Corsi]] or [[ WorldNetDaily]] ''may'' be thought, Wikipedia [[WP:UNCENSORED|does not judge]] what they say, but under [[WP:RSOPINION]] simply and neutrally reports that it was said.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=Jerome+Corsi&fulltext=1][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=+WorldNetDaily&fulltext=1]  Same goes for [[Blogcritics]], as a site [[WP:USEBYOTHERS|themselves quoted by and used by reliable sources]] and widely used through consensus across Wikipedia,[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=Blogcritics&fulltext=1] it would seem that disallowing citations to sourcable opinions would result in a large number of deletions across the project. I am not asserting THAT any opinion-maker is correct, but am simply showing  that an opinion was made. '''[[User:MichaelQSchmidt|<font color="blue">Schmidt,</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:MichaelQSchmidt|<sup><small>MICHAEL Q.</small></sup>]]'' 01:40, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 
::::*Well... "extreme and marginal" as [[Jerome Corsi|Corsi]] or [[ WorldNetDaily]] ''may'' be thought, Wikipedia [[WP:UNCENSORED|does not judge]] what they say, but under [[WP:RSOPINION]] simply and neutrally reports that it was said.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=Jerome+Corsi&fulltext=1][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=+WorldNetDaily&fulltext=1]  Same goes for [[Blogcritics]], as a site [[WP:USEBYOTHERS|themselves quoted by and used by reliable sources]] and widely used through consensus across Wikipedia,[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=Blogcritics&fulltext=1] it would seem that disallowing citations to sourcable opinions would result in a large number of deletions across the project. I am not asserting THAT any opinion-maker is correct, but am simply showing  that an opinion was made. '''[[User:MichaelQSchmidt|<font color="blue">Schmidt,</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:MichaelQSchmidt|<sup><small>MICHAEL Q.</small></sup>]]'' 01:40, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::*Prioryman asked for a second opinion, and mine is that neither source is appropriate. The first Corsi opinion piece, which is criticizing an MSNBC piece on the movie, ends with an offer to sell the reader a DVD of Gilbert's movie. Using it is simply inappropriate—and by extension, the other Corsi WND piece—especially as all the information being sourced for this article is also available from a [[WP:RS]] that presumably has no bias, ''The Hollywood Reporter'' (including the two-year claim). There's no need or reason for Corsi's opinions to be here. As for the "Confessions of an Overworked Mom" blogger, who describes her blog as "a site devoted to helping busy moms make choices about the eco-friendly, time saving, gourmet products they use in their homes", she strikes me as a very odd choice for commenting on Gilbert's work. Is there no professional, more reliable source available? This review is the sole seeming basis for the later statement, "was more poorly received" (since the other reviewer gives 1.5 of 5 stars, a pretty bad review despite the emphasis given here to its "thorough overview"), and this strikes me as a pretty weak justification. [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 17:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 
:::::*Prioryman asked for a second opinion, and mine is that neither source is appropriate. The first Corsi opinion piece, which is criticizing an MSNBC piece on the movie, ends with an offer to sell the reader a DVD of Gilbert's movie. Using it is simply inappropriate—and by extension, the other Corsi WND piece—especially as all the information being sourced for this article is also available from a [[WP:RS]] that presumably has no bias, ''The Hollywood Reporter'' (including the two-year claim). There's no need or reason for Corsi's opinions to be here. As for the "Confessions of an Overworked Mom" blogger, who describes her blog as "a site devoted to helping busy moms make choices about the eco-friendly, time saving, gourmet products they use in their homes", she strikes me as a very odd choice for commenting on Gilbert's work. Is there no professional, more reliable source available? This review is the sole seeming basis for the later statement, "was more poorly received" (since the other reviewer gives 1.5 of 5 stars, a pretty bad review despite the emphasis given here to its "thorough overview"), and this strikes me as a pretty weak justification. [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 17:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
:*[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] No action has been taken on the above issues in the week since the nominator was notified. Allowing one more week for the issues to be addressed, since an icon was not previously given. [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 00:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Revision as of 00:49, 5 February 2013

Joel Gilbert

  • Reviewed: Albert G. Mumma
  • Comment: A December 22 stub sent to AFD the same day as creation, but rescued through some easy-to-perform 5x expansion and sourcing

Created/expanded by MichaelQSchmidt (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk). Nominated by MichaelQSchmidt (talk) at 05:56, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg I've had a look through it and made a number of copyedits. It's generally OK, but a few of the sources are very questionable, either being blogs or categorically unreliable sources: specifically #11 (Blogcritics), #13 and #15 (WND) and #16 (Right Wing Watch). I don't think the article can be accepted with these sources being used. Prioryman (talk) 22:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Well said, Michael. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 05:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Sorry for overlooking the fact that this was outstanding. To be honest, I am still uncertain about these sources, especially quoting someone as extreme and marginal as Corsi. I'll ask on WT:DYK for a second opinion. Prioryman (talk) 19:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Prioryman asked for a second opinion, and mine is that neither source is appropriate. The first Corsi opinion piece, which is criticizing an MSNBC piece on the movie, ends with an offer to sell the reader a DVD of Gilbert's movie. Using it is simply inappropriate—and by extension, the other Corsi WND piece—especially as all the information being sourced for this article is also available from a WP:RS that presumably has no bias, The Hollywood Reporter (including the two-year claim). There's no need or reason for Corsi's opinions to be here. As for the "Confessions of an Overworked Mom" blogger, who describes her blog as "a site devoted to helping busy moms make choices about the eco-friendly, time saving, gourmet products they use in their homes", she strikes me as a very odd choice for commenting on Gilbert's work. Is there no professional, more reliable source available? This review is the sole seeming basis for the later statement, "was more poorly received" (since the other reviewer gives 1.5 of 5 stars, a pretty bad review despite the emphasis given here to its "thorough overview"), and this strikes me as a pretty weak justification. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg No action has been taken on the above issues in the week since the nominator was notified. Allowing one more week for the issues to be addressed, since an icon was not previously given. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)