Talk:Death Column

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: South America

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	South American military history task force

Use of theses as sources

G'day, great work with this. It isn't clear what level of theses the sources are. Please advise whether masters or doctorate theses, and whether successful or not. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "whether successful or not"? Torimem (talk) 00:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did the authors receive the intended degree as a result of the defence of their thesis? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:23, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Peacemaker67 I'm not entirely sure, but I do think so, yes, otherwise the thesis wouldn't have been puplished in the first place. Torimem (talk) 02:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, reasonable assumption, but what level degree? See WP:SCHOLARSHIP. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I already included them if by level you mean Masters or Doctorate. Torimem (talk) 20:39, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sort of. One says “dissertation thesis” Which doesn’t provide that information, which is needed. Two are masters. How do they meet WP:SCHOLARSHIP? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:37, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Three of them are masters (Castro, 2016, Tecchio, 2012 and Toledo, 2020). Castro, Tecchio and Toledo have published elsewhere about the same topics. Toledo, weakest of the three, is only cited once, to page 29, which itself cites older books. He has published on the same topic in the Revista de Direito Militar da Associação dos Magistrados da Justiça Militar Estadual, which I can't find but at the very least means other people have checked his work for inaccuracies, and not just the three reviewers during his masters. Serraria (talk) 20:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's more like the level of detail I was after. However, this article has a heavy reliance on various theses (about a quarter of all footnotes), and as WP:SCHOLARSHIP says, these can be primary sources in significant respects. Have the matters covered by these footnotes not been published elsewhere? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:06, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They're about as primary as the books, they're critical analyses of primary sources. When their authors submit similar work to journals, it's a lot smaller than the original dissertation as they're given limited space and have to include only the most important information; a lot of details are left out, but this doesn't mean those details are inaccurate (same author, same sources and same methodology as what got published in a journal). The cited information is often part of the literature review section, citing old secondary books I can't get my hands on. And sometimes it's citing old primary books written by historical witnesses. Furthermore, the dissertations are more recent sources, closer to modern scholarly consensus and comment on the primary and secondary books they cite in light of modern consensus. Care is required, but that also applies to the books, which also have mistakes. Serraria (talk) 11:29, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't write WP policies, the community does. I am expressing concern that this article might rely too heavily on theses/dissertations. I would expect the same issues to be raised if it was nominated for a GAN. I'm taking this off my watchlist. In my view it is still Milhist C-Class. Feel free to take it to WP:MHAR for a second opinion if you wish. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 12:13, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]