Jump to content

Talk:Missy Cummings

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


Comment on edit war by User:QRep2020

[edit]

Please don't remove well sourced information from Wikipedia. Twitter can be used as a source if the source is direct quotes from the person themselves. Also please don't use a personal vendetta against Teslarati as a reason to remove Teslarati used as a source. It's a reputable source that is recited by other publications. Teslarati is not mentioned as a source that should not be used on WP:RSPSRC. If you wish to deem it as an unreliable source, please start a discussion on WP:RSN. If you have specific issues with the way things were worded I am fine with changing them. Do you have any suggestions? Ergzay (talk) 08:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, your use of Twitter here is completely unacceptable. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies As I replied on my talk page, you apparently did not look at the tweets in question. They are direct screenshots of tweets from the person in question and thus count as primary sources of the said person's behavior and real activity. This is done elsewhere on Wikipedia for other notable people (see Donald Trump and Elon Musk pages as two examples) where tweets from the people in question are used in their articles as primary sources. Ergzay (talk) 15:23, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Among other things, you are attempting to push an interpretation of her tweets that she condones violence, which is libelous. Also, section consisting of a single sentence is superfluous—the line fits fine under Focus and views just as criticisms are handled on, for example, Elon Musk#Views. QRep2020 (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ergzay, I think you need to start assuming less and reading more. I did look, and this is not acceptable as a source for this supposed claim of violence. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies So if I get a source that re-reports on her deleted tweets, would that be sufficient then? Ergzay (talk) 23:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that would be start, yes—reliable secondary sources. But it all depends on the quality of those publications. Drmies (talk) 00:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why the quality would matter if it's simply re-reporting events of what happened that are independently verifiable. Ergzay (talk) 02:18, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]