Talk:Operation Pitting

Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, TMW
, instead of edit warring, I think it's more appropriate for us to discuss our differences with regards to each other's edits and hopefully come to a resolution.

These are the issues I have with your edits, which began here:


 * You cite no verifiable sources - As you probably know, everything you add needs to be verifiable via citations as per WP:VERIFY and WP:CITE.
 * Your reference for "Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, TMW", according to your edit summary, is an image. I checked the only image in your provided source, which is this but it's not verifiable; it's just a photo of a lone medic, taken from a distance, and there's no conclusive evidence, such as a patch, to suggest she's from "Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, TMW".
 * "1x Flight Nurse and 1x Flight Medic provided medical cover for each flight. 1xAELO coordinated patient evacuation from Kabul." - You provided no citations for this.
 * In another edit summary you claimed your sources were RAF Regiment and No. 99 Squadron RAF social media posts but you didn't provide either with your edits. I tried to find them myself but couldn't so I asked you to provide them in a subsequent edit, which you didn't.
 * You kept using broken references and duplicated another instead of using named references. Your account suggests you're fairly new so if you don't know how to reference properly I'm happy to reference for you if you provide me your sources. If not, check out WP:REFB.


 * You use jargon - This needs to be avoided as per WP:TECHNICAL. What are "AELO" and "TMW", for example? You need to word things in a way so that the widest possible audience can understand.

Ultimately, I appreciate your efforts and I'm convinced your edits are in good faith but I'm opposed to you repeatedly adding things without verifiable sources.

If anyone wants to provide a third opinion, feel free. TheArmchairSoldier (talk) 13:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Facebook reference
Could you please elaborate on why you’re so opposed to the inclusion of this reference?

https://www.facebook.com/airbornesappers/posts/1295645940906410

You’ve removed it a number of times, stating it’s against WP:UGC because it’s a social media source. I’m sure you’re aware that it’s not a binary issue and that some social media posts are permissible under some circumstances. I strongly believe this to be the case here. The source is an official RAF Facebook page publishing information released by the RAF. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong — you’re clearly the more experienced editor here — but does that not make it usable as per WP:FACEBOOK? TheArmchairSoldier (talk) 15:36, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I generally prefer not to use Facebook as anybody can put anything on Facebook and claim it to be true.

I was however unaware of WP:FACEBOOK so with that in mind I will let facebook be used in this page due to the page being official RAF facebook page. Maurice Oly (talk) 15:44, 13 September 2021 (UTC)