Talk:Paul A. Levine: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
r |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:::Not completely sure what is being said here, but there is an outstanding issue that some paragraphs, and especially in the prizes section, don't have specific supporting inline citations. Also, the few inline citations that are present are [[WP:PSTS|primary sources]], so could use more diversity of secondary source citations. Also, academic sites may not automatically be assumed to be [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], although many are no doubt good sources for Wikipedia purposes. Also, some items in the "Further reading" section could be more specific as to where to find the origin/publisher. [[User:Dl2000|Dl2000]] ([[User talk:Dl2000|talk]]) 02:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC) |
:::Not completely sure what is being said here, but there is an outstanding issue that some paragraphs, and especially in the prizes section, don't have specific supporting inline citations. Also, the few inline citations that are present are [[WP:PSTS|primary sources]], so could use more diversity of secondary source citations. Also, academic sites may not automatically be assumed to be [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], although many are no doubt good sources for Wikipedia purposes. Also, some items in the "Further reading" section could be more specific as to where to find the origin/publisher. [[User:Dl2000|Dl2000]] ([[User talk:Dl2000|talk]]) 02:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC) |
||
{{paid|user=מתיאל|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}} |
Revision as of 14:52, 12 August 2021
![]() | Biography Unassessed | ||||||
|
- Hey, all the sources here are from an academic sites, so why this remark pattern is still there?
מתיאל (talk) 15:12, 29 November 2020 (UTC)מתיאל
- Hey, all the sources here are from an academic sites, so why this remark pattern is still there? מתיאל (talk) 13:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)מתיאל
- Not completely sure what is being said here, but there is an outstanding issue that some paragraphs, and especially in the prizes section, don't have specific supporting inline citations. Also, the few inline citations that are present are primary sources, so could use more diversity of secondary source citations. Also, academic sites may not automatically be assumed to be reliable sources, although many are no doubt good sources for Wikipedia purposes. Also, some items in the "Further reading" section could be more specific as to where to find the origin/publisher. Dl2000 (talk) 02:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Incorrect template usage. Please use {{connected contributor (paid)}} instead.