use of self-published sources by Brett Stevens to describe the views of Brett Stevens Latest comment: 5 months ago @Llll5032, you have made a number of edits, removing Stevens from the category "American Zionists", complaining that this fact is not reliably sourced, as well as removing all additions I made in regards to Stevens political views, complaining that they are from self-published sources. If you were to read one of the pages that you linked to, you would find that Wikipedia may consider self-published sources to be reliable, when discussing themselves: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they are established experts in the field, so long as:the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;it does not involve claims about third parties;it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; andthe article is not based primarily on such sources." As you can see, my additions fit these requirements to the letter. I must assume good-faith, so you must not have been aware of these guidelines. Harry Sibelius (talk) 06:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC) No, the sentences in question fail to meet the ABOUTSELF requirements, because the claims are potentially exceptional (see WP:ABOUTSELF #1) and the passage is long (see WP:ABOUTSELF #5). Also, more importantly, the sentences contain several general claims ("Stevens supports Zionism", "Stevens opposes anti-Semitism" and "Stevens affirms the Holocaust") that per WP:PRIMARY can only be made by third-party reliable sources: ""Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation."" The onus is on you to find third-party reliable sources that can support the claims. Llll5032 (talk) 06:59, 1 April 2023 (UTC) You will then have to explain why these claims could possibly be considered "self-serving" or "exceptional". Why do you consider it to be self-serving or exceptional of Stevens to claim that he supports Zionism and believes in the Holocaust? You also seem to be attempting to take issue with the lack of secondary or tertiary sources. However, this is only needed to interpret information contained within primary sources, yet you deleted direct quotations from Stevens, as well, which do not consititute intrepretations, and hence cannot be deleted.

use of self-published sources by Brett Stevens to describe the views of Brett Stevens Latest comment: 5 months ago @Llll5032, you have made a number of edits, removing Stevens from the category "American Zionists", complaining that this fact is not reliably sourced, as well as removing all additions I made in regards to Stevens political views, complaining that they are from self-published sources. If you were to read one of the pages that you linked to, you would find that Wikipedia may consider self-published sources to be reliable, when discussing themselves: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they are established experts in the field, so long as:the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;it does not involve claims about third parties;it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; andthe article is not based primarily on such sources." As you can see, my additions fit these requirements to the letter. I must assume good-faith, so you must not have been aware of these guidelines. Harry Sibelius (talk) 06:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC) No, the sentences in question fail to meet the ABOUTSELF requirements, because the claims are potentially exceptional (see WP:ABOUTSELF #1) and the passage is long (see WP:ABOUTSELF #5). Also, more importantly, the sentences contain several general claims ("Stevens supports Zionism", "Stevens opposes anti-Semitism" and "Stevens affirms the Holocaust") that per WP:PRIMARY can only be made by third-party reliable sources: ""Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation."" The onus is on you to find third-party reliable sources that can support the claims. Llll5032 (talk) 06:59, 1 April 2023 (UTC) You will then have to explain why these claims could possibly be considered "self-serving" or "exceptional". Why do you consider it to be self-serving or exceptional of Stevens to claim that he supports Zionism and believes in the Holocaust? You also seem to be attempting to take issue with the lack of secondary or tertiary sources. However, this is only needed to interpret information contained within primary sources, yet you deleted direct quotations from Stevens, as well, which do not consititute intrepretations, and hence cannot be deleted.
https://djsumdog.com/media/3dc270c69933a5b3d34a2839bc7554062337ca8cbe076ea1b7fd16f91542759d.png

Notices where this attachment appears

Public

Notices where this attachment appears