User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive/2021/Sep

Belated thank you
I very much appreciate your kind nod in my July RfA. I will make every effort not to disappoint. If I can be of service or am otherwise blind to some concern, I invite you to contact me. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 17:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, and best of luck as an admin. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Critic
Hello. Need your advice as a specialist. A journalistic investigation was released about the huge amount of real estate in one of the persons. There is no confirmation of this official information. This person claimed that this was not her property. The source in which the journalistic investigation was published is not authoritative, but the information from this journalistic investigation was literally reprinted by several well-known and authoritative publications. Just reprinted it, without analyzing this information and evaluating it. Can we add this information by referring to these authoritative publications? Thanks! 2A00:1FA1:3DB:6D53:E9F2:CFE2:DDB7:8185 (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the question. I am not sure I understand all of it completely, but I think I have figured out the basic question. The first issue is whether the mere fact that someone owns some real estate is important enough to mention in an article at all. Assuming it is, based on what you have told me, I would be comfortable reporting the information based on the sources you have described, if there were no genuine dispute that it is the person's property. If the person is disputing it, then the choices are either to leave out the information, or to include it but to report that it was stated in the specific source. As in "XYZ publication reported that the property belonged to Mr. Jones [citations], but Mr. Jones denied it [citations]." Which of these is a better solution will depend on the facts of the specific situation; it's hard to give a general answer without more details.


 * Now I have a question back to you: how do we know that the "well-known and authoritative publications" merely "reprinted [the non-authoritative source's information], without analyzing this information and evaluating it"?  Every source occasionally cuts corners or makes mistakes, but if a publication routinely reprints unverified information without analyzing and evaluating it, I'm not sure why it would be considered "well-known and authoritative" ... so conversely, if several sources reprinted the information, it suggests that they must have checked it out before reporting it, even if they didn't say so. On the other hand, it's certainly possible that they didn't ... as with so many other things, the devil is in the details. I hope this helps, although I haven't given you a definitive answer, and I don't know that anyone else could, either. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * help. 2A00:1FA1:4133:632E:AE:6D61:7DFC:4FB7 (talk) 21:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

September 29: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon + Annual Members' Meeting NYC
Upcoming events:
 * Prospect Park photo contest, ongoing
 * Latinx Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, October 6
 * Wiki-Pavilion Picnic NYC in Prospect Park (with WikiProject Craft + WikiConference North America), October 10

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 04:40, 28 September 2021 (UTC)