Talk:Charles Moses

Question on: "...becoming the first Allied war correspondent to report from the east bank of the Rhine."
From context this seems to be in concert with Monty's crossing which was in late March (22ish?). Did not the US war correspondents Howard Cohan and Andy Rooney cross the Rhine on the 7nth with elements of the US 1st army at Remagen? CactusFlower (talk) 18:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)


 * The source used actually says: "In this capacity he observed at close-hand and reported on Field-Marshal Montgomery’s attack on Wesel on the Rhine and then joined the commandos crossing the river. He was the first correspondent to do so." Nothing close to "...first Allied war correspondent to report from the east bank of the Rhine." Whoever inflated this statement (which I would check on anyway if I were an historian) has an agenda or cannot read. I am deleting the clause. CactusFlower (talk) 19:47, 25 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Not an experienced Wp'r. Far from it. But I can figure out who wrote this nonsense. I kinda know now what you folk paint and allow. CactusFlower (talk) 22:16, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * You do realise that Wikipedia is written by mostly unqualified volunteers don't you? I can't comment on the issue you have highlighted above as I didn't write it and it is beyond my knowledge at any rate; however, from my own personal experience as a contributor I know that I have unintentionally made numerous errors in interpreting sources over the years which have sometimes resulted in the introduction of errors of fact into the articles I have edited. Sometimes my errors have been quickly noticed by other editors who have helpfully (and mostly in good humour) fixed my mistake, while sometimes said errors have languished for years without being picked up and probably still exist to this day. To me that seems a far more likely explanation for any potential error in this article too. Its up to you if you want to assume that any error in an article you find was deliberately placed there out of malice but I don't think such an attitude is going to get you very far in the long run. Its good that you have taken an interest in trying to improve the encyclopedia and I certainly encourage you to continue to do so, but assuming bad faith on the part of the rest of us that also choose to contribute to the project seems likely to be counterproductive for you. But its up to you how you chose to conduct yourself of course. Anotherclown (talk) 00:12, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Anotherclown The person who wrote that nonsense advertises himself as a "degreed" Military historian. Oxymoron? Whatever. You just pile on without looking into it. CactusFlower (talk) 22:56, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * My disgust at the blatant chauvinism and/or incompetence displayed by the original poster User:Hawkeye7 was then exacerbated by you, User:Anotherclown, when you attacked me. Thus I stopped donating to wikipedia and trusting in anything I read here. I have spread this message to folk I know. (PS my PhD aint in Military history.) CactusFlower (talk) 21:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Use of vanity journals as sources
User:Darkness Shines: I question the use of the likes of "Global Media Journal". 'Twould appear to be a vanity house. "Australian Dictionary of Biography" also perhaps questionable. If articles in either of the aforementioned use references to more reputable media they should be cited. 75.173.15.133 (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The Australian Dictionary of Biography is produced by the National Centre of Biography at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra. The articles are written by experts in their field. In the case of Charles Moses, the biography was written by Neville Petersen, a journalism professor at the University of Queensland, who is best known for his books about the ABC such as Whose news?: Organisational Conflict in the ABC, 1947-1999 and News not Views: the ABC, the Press, & Politics.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * User_talk:Hawkeye7 You may be proving my point. That being: please use the more recognized references these sources cite. And if they do not have citations from other sources...well? 75.173.15.133 (talk) 21:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * User_talk:Hawkeye7 As an example: if said sources just quote Mr. Moses from an interview, then they are no more than primary suspect sources at best. 75.173.15.133 (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * All secondary sources are based on primary sources. On Wikipedia, we can use primary sources for facts, but generally prefer to rely on secondary sources. The secondary sources used in the article are high quality ones, which have been written by subject experts, and have been peer-reviewed.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:48, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * User_talk:Hawkeye7 Certainly you should proceed to write your history of "mediocre-A" as written by "mediocre-A" himself because "mediocre-A" is an Aussie (in some vague sense) and you have an obscure book/article that quotes him and you can hence pad your wikipedia stats with things from it--with the occasional taradiddle (assuming that since "A" is so mediocre no one will notice). I have wandered around and perused your contributions to wikipedia and much of the empty content is as described above. You are rather disgraceful and I had hoped fellow Aussies would have reined you in--but no. 75.173.18.64 (talk) 21:54, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Seriously...does anyone read this as fact or puffery?
Read the article. Anyone? User:Hawkeye7 or perhaps User:Darkness Shines? Especially the section about him falling in love with a wee Irish lass and then having to brave the thugs of the IRA with his trusty webley? On notice to provide support for this section before I delete.CactusFlower (talk) 18:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry. Did not realize User:Darkness Shines was indef blocked. Should I restore what he reverted on this page? CactusFlower (talk) 18:40, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * If you want to join him.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Kind of like you User:Hawkeye7 to threaten me--is this why you get turned out from admin stuff? Why not revert what racist-blocked guy reverted and start again? Do you stand by the silly "wee Irish Colleen saved by the brit from IRA thugs" story? Why do I suspect I will find other such nonsense in your past editing history (as well as User:Darkness Shines)? Please take it to heart: your historian credentials are in the balance. CactusFlower (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)