Talk:Crowds on Demand

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Crowds on Demand. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:50, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Supposed violation of WP:RS in JohnAlbertRigali's December 23, 2017 edit[edit]

Objective3000, you reverted my aforementioned edit with the claim that it violated Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources - presumably by citing Zero Hedge as a source. I'm not aware of anything that designates Zero Hedge as an unreliable source. In fact, Wikipedia:NEWSBLOG seems to defend it to a certain extent. Can you please elucidate? -JohnAlbertRigali (talk) 03:05, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEWSBLOG refers to, for example, blogs at The Washington Post containing the writings of well-known professionals in their fields. Even then, care must be taken in their use. Zero Hedge is not known for editorial oversight, required by WP:IRS. Instead, it contains the opinions of three people all using the same name. You can search the archives at WP:RSN for Zero Hedge. You will find a search function there. On top of that, we should not be adding speculations to the article. O3000 (talk) 12:18, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't regard The Washington Post as a reliable source. I see now how, overall, Zero Hedge fails WP:IRS...but that means that all Zero Hedge content must be excluded regardless of the facts that it contains. Is that its fate? And my purpose was not so much to mention a speculation, but to direct readers' attention to the cited blog post, which contains facts that reveal that (1) CoD was involved in the counter-protest against the Unite the Right rally, and (2) lied to Snopes.com about it; I used the word "speculated" because Zero Hedge is a blog, but the blog post reads like a thinly veiled exposé instead. -JohnAlbertRigali (talk) 23:35, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An encyclopedia does not include speculations and must be built upon reliable sources. O3000 (talk) 23:38, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crowds_on_Demand&oldid=1199991948"