User talk:Puzzle me not

September 2010
Please do not make unnecessary changes to citation style, or delete links to reliable sources, as you did on Mei Shigenobu. If a source link goes dead, it should be recovered from the Internet Archive or other sources. If the link is to the online version of a print publication, then even if the weblink is dead, the citation still allows people to find the printed edition of the publication in question. cab (call)

Reply CaliforniaAliBaba
1.	What is a reliable source? A commentary on a dead blog? (“Myrtos Magazine” is not an online version of a print publication. It is a Japanese Blog) Blogs are not reliable sources by any standards. So removing such citation is not tampering with a “reliable source”. Furthermore, you say that “it should be recovered from the Internet Archive or other sources”, and it is clear that it is not on the server anymore, so it is unrecoverable (please check all these things before retaining a "citation", labeling them a “dead link”.

2.	Audiovisual works and information about them can be cited. The most reliable source for their citation is either their official website or from an official trailer posted by the creators of that audiovisual work. Even published reviews are considered secondary in this case. These works are publicized by the creators themselves on You Tube. Therefore, such sources are reliable, even if they are retained from You Tube.

3.	Please read the references that you are deleting, they were placed there for a reason. For example, nowhere in Mei Shigenobu’s interviews does she personally say that she supports her mother’s “Terrorism”, but she says that she supports her “cause”. These two words have different connotations, i.e. “terrorism” is the act, and “cause” is the belief system behind the act, and she is clearly differentiating between the two. Even in that same sentence that I am correcting; “speaks of her mother's terrorism in sympathetic terms, although regretful of the violence used by the Japanese Red Army in support of the cause” there is a clear contradiction. How can you be sympathetic of “terrorism” and at the same time be regretful of the violence? As you know, personal accounts (interviews) are the best and most reliable sources of a person’s opinion. Secondhand accounts of a person's opinion, i.e. a journalist’s or a writer’s, are often inaccurate and that is what leads to stereotypes and prejudices.

It seems you have been working on many Wikipedia pages and improving them, and that is great, but do give the subject matter some justice by reading what they are really about before relying on your stereotypes. We all have stereotypes and prejudices that we believe are facts, but when we are faced with a different opinion about the matter that should be chance for us to open up our minds.

Besides, on Wikipedia there should be an effort to neutrality, we should leave the judgment to the person who reads the piece. Puzzle me not (talk) 20:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Myrtos is a magazine sold in bookstores and a book publishing company. Furthermore the Internet Archive keeps backup versions of many pages even after they have been removed from the original webserver. That is why they call it an "archive". I didn't realise that the videos were uploaded by the creators, rather than being copyright violations. Regardless, on Wikipedia, we prefer citations to official websites rather than YouTube where available. cab (call) 23:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

>>Thank you, I did a search and found their new website is now selling those magazines, but the article is not even about the subject matter. You have in your profile that you can read Japanese, so please check it. The article is about Hamas(＜日本の非常識から見た中東の非常識＞ハマス政権がもたらす惨状 ――― 滝川義人). So, if anything, they could have mentioned a quotation from Shigenobu. Now, the dead link leads you to a website that promotes "friendship" with, and "understanding" of Israel, as well as sales of book for the same purpose. So it is questionable if we can say this is an unbiased source of information (that is preferred by Wikipedia) on this topic, especially when there are many other mass media publications we can refer to. Regarding You Tube citation, Indies productions use You Tube too to promote their work. You can find the You Tube link embedded on their official websites. Besides, you were also deleting the official website citations and the whole information all together! So does that mean you were not checking what you were deleting? Puzzle me not (talk) 21:09, 16 September 2010 (UTC)