User talk:Phelim Brady

November 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Tommy Makem, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 21:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Tommy Makem. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 21:19, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

You changed Tommy Makem to state that the accident occurred at Kidder Press. It didn't, and your source didn't say it did. Falsifying what sources actually say is one of the fastest ways to get blocked or banned here on Wikipedia. Should there be conflicting stories, we include and source them both. Your new source only says he worked at Kidder. You can't say the accident occurred there based on that source. Yworo (talk) 21:30, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Yworo, Please let me know how to refute information from a "reliable source." The NY Times obit is wrong. Tommy Makem never worked in any textile mill in Dover. Phelim Brady (talk) 06:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Phelim Brady (talk) 18:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Yworo, The textile mills in Dover ceased operations in 1937,http://www.library.unh.edu/special/index.php/cotton-mills-of-dover, http://www.dover.lib.nh.us/DoverHistory/mill_history.htm ...18 years before Tommy arrived. Phelim Brady (talk) 18:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Interesting. The NYT isn't usually so inaccurate. My guess is that Kidder Press was one of the businesses housed in the old mills between 1940 and the late '60/early '70s. I'll make the NYT article further reading and just use the Conor Makem source, that seems the best way to resolve this. Yworo (talk) 19:03, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Kidder Press was in a stand-alone building out on Broadway (the current Goss International Americas,) about a mile from the mills. The NYT obit has several inaccuracies. I think Mr Makem's memory would be best served if it weren't referenced at all. Phelim Brady (talk) 19:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Phelim Brady (talk) 19:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Needs to stay in. Wikipedia is not a memorial. You could always write to the Times and have them post corrections. Yworo (talk) 19:55, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Yworo, Please excuse my ignorance, I am new to Wikipedia, but where do all the unsourced facts come from? Are these facts that have been corroborated and so the reference to source material has been deleted? 24.147.63.99 (talk) 23:51, 27 November 2011 (UTC) also, removing the reference to the NYT obit has little to do with memorializing, but rather accurate information from reliable sources. Though it seems an anomaly, the obituary has erroneous information, making it unreliable. My guess... the writer, Douglas Martin, was told to write a certain number of words on Tommy Makem. He did some google searches and made a couple phone calls, then extrapolated his own story from the few facts he had. 24.147.63.99 (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Where do what unsourced facts come from? In this article? In Wikipedia? If you mean Wikipedia in general, which also explains this article, Wikipedia's requirements for sources evolved as Wikipedia evolved. Requirements were less stringent when Wikipedia was new. A lot of unsourced content got written. Then the requirements for sourcing got stricter, editors now add citation requests for things that seem unusual or questionable, for details like degrees and awards and quotations, which all require sourcing. The standard for Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. When reliable sources disagree, policy states that we present multiple views.
 * As for the NYT article, it is no longer being used as a reference. It is simply listed as further reading. If a source were found that states that the NYT article is inaccurate, then we could add a comment or footnote to that effect. In principle, further reading should contain all substantive articles about the subject that are not used as sources. Reliability is generally determined by the publishing process: a third-party publication with editorial control is considered reliable. It can't be deemed unreliable through original research or personal knowledge, but only through other reliable sources about that source itself which detail its inaccuracies. Yworo (talk) 15:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)