Talk:ICCF U.S.A.

This article was nominated for deletion on 4 May 2013. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

The article was provided by: Ruth Ann Fay Ref.: ICCF 2000 Publication Updated for Wikipedia 2007

--YoavD 05:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sources

References to sources were removed today, on the basis that they are primary sources, not secondary. I think these sources are OK. For instance, it is not the person saying that he won the championship - it is the ICCF-US. That is sort of a primary source, but not directly. And I think the ICCF-US is a reliable source for this. I doubt you will be able to find a true secondary source. I am in favor of allowing those references. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 20:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Primary sources are permitted on wikipedia. Quale (talk) 23:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting from wp:primary

Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources, though primary sources are permitted if used carefully. Material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than to the original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.

Primary sources cannot be used to establish notability, which certainly makes sense. But also these factual statements are not interpretations, analysis, or synthesis. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me give an example of what is not fine: "Attendees included both US World Champions and delegates and friends from 20 nations <ref>http://jfcampbell.us/congress/2000.htm</ref>." Such a claim needs a secondary source. If an organisation were to claim "we have communicated with aliens", Wikipedia wouldn't state "this organisation has communicated with aliens", but rather "this organisation claims to have communicated with aliens". Toccata quarta (talk) 03:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. If an organization said that they communicated with aliens, there is reason to doubt it. I don't see any reason to doubt the statement about attendees. Any secondary source would probably be citing that primary source. There is no interpretation, etc. Now if they said that the US champions were better than the ones from the rest of the world, that would be an interpretation that would need a secondary source. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The example re "communicating with alens" is no joke! (Our 18-year long President of our World Chess Federation has claimed to have communicated with aliens!) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:32, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the relevant policy is in the WP:EXCEPTIONAL section of WP:V. Communicating with extraterrestials is an exceptional claim. The ICCF claim on attendees is not. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:39, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]