User talk:81.129.146.148

I am going to have some lunch and then I'll write you a nice long reply. So check back in a hour or so. --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

point by point

You stated in responce to my adding to the Yasmin Alibhai-Brown entry a ref by the Cambridge University Conservative Association that, "It's just the same references again - get a reliable source - the BBC, the guardian, the times, the independent, the economist etc etc)".

No it is not. It is the Cambridge University Conservative Association whose President is The Rt. Hon. Michael Howard Q.C., M.P. and former leader of the opposition. The discussion took place on the BBC World Service and was recorded and republished word for word on the Libertarian Alliance website.

I must be missing something because I can only find links to the LA website in the article history? We have to be careful with transcripts contained on third party sites because in the past we have had problems with people altering them and claiming they are "word for word".

How can anyone provide a reference for this from one of those papers if those papers did not write about it? More to the point why should they?

This raises the second problem with inclusion, as a general rule of thumb, if an incident is notable in the life of an individual, then it will be mentioned by notable sources. We don't aim to cover every aspect of a subject's life but just bits that are notable. If this event has never been covered by sources we consider notable, then it would get in anyway because we would consider it undue weight to include it WP:UNDUE. Are you saying that this *hasn't* been covered by any major media source or other commentator?

The vast majority of references on wikipedia do not come straight from a newspaper.

No they don't, I wasn't stated that the source *must* be a newspaper but giving an example of the type of sources that wikipedia uses and considers reliable. You can read more about Reliable sources at WP:RS - they include Television sources, radio sources, Academic journals, newspapers, magazines etc etc etc.

I am of the opinion that you simply do not wish Alibhai-Browns speech on the BBC program to be included here, full stop, and will do anything to insure it is not included.

Well you are wrong, broadly speaking I couldn't give a chuff about Alibhai-Browns (I have a vague idea who she is but that's about it) but I do care about our core policies including WP:BLP. Let me tell you how I became involved in this - We have a board where people bring problems with articles about living people to the attention of other editors. For wont of a better word, I am one of the regulars who monitors that board and checks articles for problems. Your additions were mentioned there and that's how I became involved. However a common reaction for editors who are involved on single articles (as you seem to be) is to assume that the rest of us have some personal reason to become involved in an article, mostly that isn't the case and it certainly isn't in this case. I can get someone else to take a look at the changes if you like but I doubt their analysis of the situation would be very different.

Now, tell me what references, apart from newspapers would suffice for you?

Well to be be honest, I (and other editors) don't know until we have seen the sources - what do you have besides the LA website? It's easier to assess specific sources than talk in general terms. Has it been mentioned on a notable news site such as the BBC or the guardian? Maybe an editorial about it in the spectator or something like that? --Cameron Scott (talk) 13:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

........... ...Thank you for the reply. I will attempt again to find another source. However, do you feel the Cambridge University Conservative Association is a good source also? 81.129.146.148 (talk) 15:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

---