Content deleted Content added
Line 529: ::* I will be interested to see how this comes out, because using non-self-serving primary sources [[WP:ABOUTSELF]] similar to this is an unresolved issue at [[GrapheneOS]] as well, where fans stronly object to including the info'. -- [[User:Yae4|Yae4]] ([[User talk:Yae4|talk]]) 08:30, 2 September 2022 (UTC) ::* Adding: Don't know why the "completed" notation was deleted, but an edit [[Special:Diff/1106425364]] has been done to incorporate this request. -- [[User:Yae4|Yae4]] ([[User talk:Yae4|talk]]) 09:44, 2 September 2022 (UTC) ::*:Thank you for the welcome. The issue here does not concern the [[WP:V|verifiability policy]] (i.e. [[WP:ABOUTSELF]]), but rather the [[WP:OR|original research]] and [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]] policies. [[WP:PSTS]] states, {{xt|"Wikipedia articles should be based on [[WP:RS|reliable]], published [[secondary source]]s and, to a lesser extent, on [[tertiary source]]s and [[primary source]]s. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and avoid novel interpretations of primary sources."}} Considering this, why are all of the citations in the [[Special:Diff/1106597494#Data leakage incident|"Data leakage incident"]] and [[Special:Diff/1106597494#3G phone sales|"3G phone sales"]] subsections primary sources? ::*:This is a neutrality issue because the primary sources in this article are overwhelmingly used to introduce negative claims that have no support from reliable secondary sources. When there are [https://community.e.foundation/c/e-foundation-community/announcements/6 over 100 announcements] in the project forum, choosing just the ones that reflect the article subject less favorably, while ignoring all of the announcements that reflect the article subject more favorably, is [[WP:CHERRYPICKING|cherrypicking]]. [[WP:PSTS]] emphasizes secondary sources because it is very easy to misuse primary sources, as this article is doing now. It is clear to many editors that adding content supported solely by primary sources to promote an article subject is not acceptable; doing the same to portray a lesser image of the article subject is equally unacceptable. ::*:Instead of selecting primary sources ourselves (e.g. picking a few announcements from the 100+ in a forum), Wikipedia articles mainly use [[WP:SECONDARY|secondary sources]], which {{xt|"rely on primary sources for their material, making analytic or evaluative claims about them"}}. A broad sample of reliable secondary sources includes the noteworthy aspects of the subject that are encyclopedic to include in the article, while excluding the aspects of the subjects that are not noteworthy enough to obtain secondary source coverage. This is why, without the support of reliable secondary sources, the [[Special:Diff/1106597494#Data leakage incident|"Data leakage incident"]] and [[Special:Diff/1106597494#3G phone sales|"3G phone sales"]] subsections should be removed from the article. ::*:The use of primary sources is relegated to uncontroversial aspects of a subject. For example, an article on a piece of software can cite the software's license file to establish the kind of license that the software uses. Also, if a reliable secondary source that is already cited in the article links to a relevant primary source, it is usually uncontroversial to cite that primary source alongside the secondary source citation. ::*:Talk pages are for article discussion, and there is no requirement to limit the discussion to the contents of an edit request. I haven't reviewed the [[GrapheneOS]] article recently, but if primary sources are also being misused there, the relevant content should also be re-examined and possibly removed. — '''''[[User:Newslinger|<span style="color:#536267;">Newslinger</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Newslinger#top|<span style="color:#708090;">talk</span>]]</small>'' 07:11, 3 September 2022 (UTC) | |||