Talk:Disappearance of Ruth Wilson

Reliability of sources
Facebook (and the Daily Mail) are deemed to be unreliable sources, so I have removed the claim regarding bullying. I am not saying that she wasn't bullied, just that on social media, anyone can claim anything they like without a reliable source. Also, the article is an odd mix of YYYYMMDD and DDMMYYY sources on the dates, as the article is about someone from Britain, I would state that we should use dmy dates and if you're in agreement about this, then conversion should happen. I have already applied the template to the article and corrected the spelling of behavior to behaviour as again, it is about someone from Britain who disappeared in Britain. Thoughts? Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 08:18, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi. Happy to go with this re ref and dates. There are some useful things on the Facebook group however. i.e the birth cert. How do I ref first hand resorts from people involved in the case if the reports come from a Facebook group? It is mainly the statements made by Ben and Catherine. I think they add a lot to the understanding of the events as the case seems to have been under reported at the time.


 * Nacentaeons Nacentaeons (talk) 09:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi; I can see by the history that you are unused to the talk pages, that's okay, if you don't mind, I can help you. First off, place a sequential number of colons into your replies and it indents the statements to make them easier to see who has stated what. Second, at the end of your statement, input four tildes ~ and that will automatically insert a timestamp and your signature.


 * Wikipedia likes to use secondary and tertiary sources as citations. This means that someone like a police officer makes a statement declaring some fact. We could use the statement direct from the Constabulary's website, but that would be a primary source. We would prefer to use, say, a BBC report on what the policeman has said, which means that it has gone through some editorial process and (hopefully) authentication by the newspeople. Facebook, Twitter etc are not reliable as anyone can state anything on there without some sort of editorial process. Sometimes, adding things in is declared as WP:OR because it does not have an accountability or reliability that the encyclopaedia needs. See WP:VERIFY.


 * I will sort the dates out at some point and I hope this hasn't put you off from editing; you've been doing some sterling work on the article, thanks. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 11:00, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * You are correct. I have never used talk before. Hopefully this works. Points noted about sources. I would like to add a photo to the page and maybe a map but the process seems onerous dues to licensing etc.Nacentaeons (talk) 11:46, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * You can only add images if you own the copyright or you have the express copyright permission to upload an image from the person who took said image. If either of the above are true, upload it to Wikimedia Commons first and then refer back to that in the article. What kind of map were you thinking of? The joy of all things (talk) 12:31, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I thought that it would be useful to add a map showing her movements on the day of disappearance as well as the place she was dropped off. There is a lot of ambiguity just saying ‘Box Hill’. i.e a lot of people think that she was dropped off in a bleak desolate location. I have an OS map but imagine that will be unusable due to licensing. Are there free wiki maps or similar? Thanks for your help so far. Nacentaeons (talk) 16:44, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * You could try Wikipedia Graphics Lab Maps who do create maps. Just add a request, but they might be really busy and no-one may undertake it. As I stated above; they will ask for reliable sources. I did look at inserting a pushpin map, but as it's so small, the dots of her movements would just be clustered around each other. You would probably need a more detailed version of the Dorking area if it was the way forward. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I have gone through the references and supplemented the Facebook and blog references and instead cited the tertiary sources that these publications referred to. However where a copy of a document such as a death certificate or newspaper scan is hosted on these sites I have incorporated this into the citation as an URL. These sites are no longer the primary ref but I though there was utility in adding these links.

I am using Mail Online for a number of the references. I believe this is not ideal. However my understating is that it was down to the discretion and not a black and white issue. I am proposing keeping these citations as I believe the claim made are not sensationalist and there is no reason to doubt their veracity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Potentially_unreliable_sources

After these improvements I have removed the citations issue message. If there are any issues please let me know. Nacentaeons (talk) 09:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)