Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Reliability/Self-published source usage report: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Trekphiler (talk | contribs) →Over the yump?: new section |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 10:
==Over the yump?==
IDK if it's been encountered yet, so let me raise one. [[Rallying]] uses the self-published ''Marathon de la Route 1931/1971'' & ''Le Rallye Monte-Carlo au XXe Siècle'' as sources. (No publisher given, just the author's name.) They don't appear to be main sources, but they are being used several times on the page (& perhaps on other pages I haven't seen). Is it known yet if they are reliable? Should they come up, let me consider this a request it be addressed; I won't be watchlisting this page for an answer. [[User:Trekphiler|<
:That issue has not been even thought about yet. My guess is that sometime in 2013 I could look at that. What this report includes is really just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. The next steps will be to resolve the ambiguities here, then deal with ISBN usage by looking up in Worldcat. That should hopefully happen in 2012. In 2013 we could then look at reporting references that have no publisher and no ISBN. That is possible, but will require significant computing resources, e.g. two computers running 24 hours a day. Given the low cost of computers, that is not a big deal, however. In any case, that was a good suggestion and I will think about it more. Thanks. [[User:History2007|History2007]] ([[User talk:History2007|talk]]) 08:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
:If you have a concern about the reliability of a particular source in a particular article the [[WP:RS/N|reliable sources noticeboard]] is the best place to get help. [[User:Fifelfoo|Fifelfoo]] ([[User talk:Fifelfoo|talk]]) 21:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
| |||