User talk:IsrarKazmiSyed
Forbes Australia Forbes.com.au
[edit]I was checking Forbes Australia website www.forbes.com.au and was confused if this as notable as Forbes.com, or it has some different scenario. I did checked the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources but couldn't find Forbes Australia and Admins mutual consensus or any comments/remarks. I also checked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_(disambiguation) but couldn't find info as well. If anyone can help me to understand.
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 16:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hi IsrarKazmiSyed. Many forbes.com.au pieces are identical to forbes.com ones. I would presume that any others are approximately as reliable as the listing at Perennial suggests. Be on the lookout for any articles by "contributors", which are unreliable. If you have a question about a specific piece, let me know. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:59, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. I have another question regarding the same. If you look at the forbes.com.au homepage in the image https://i.postimg.cc/pXFNSv0c/image.png it shows an article with title "From Canva to Clove: AI recipe startup cooks up $4m raise" and on homepage it shows "By Shivaune Field Forbes Staff" but when we click on the article https://www.forbes.com.au/news/entrepreneurs/from-canva-to-clove-ai-recipe-startup-cooks-up-4m-raise/ it only shows her name. So this will be considered as Editorial since it was a staff member or no? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Usually when we say that something is "editorial", we mean that it is an opinion piece, often one authored by the editorial board of the outlet itself. This seems like a non-opinion news piece. Yes, it's clear that Field is a staff writer and not a contributor. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you so much @Firefangledfeathers. There is another similar situation but on a different website. As per Perennial_sources Mashable Non-Sponsored Content is fine for Notability. If we look at https://nl.mashable.com/entrepreneurs/9202/tomas-gorny-from-humble-beginnings-to-customer-experience-innovator it shows Author: Redactie. When I searched Wikipedia, I found the URL: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/redactie that says it means Editorial Staff. Is that correct, or I am understanding this as Editorial/Staff reporter and this is not the case? A publication like this on nl.mashable.com would be considered as Notable and Reliable? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 21:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Mashable is marginally reliable, and the notes say to take it case by case. That particular article looks pretty non-independent. It reads at a glance like it was written by the subject's PR team. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 23:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the answer @Firefangledfeathers. I get it now. So the content, and story also matters, not the website only or the Author. I have another question, is it really matter that the website has it's own Wikipedia page to be considered notable publication or if a website complies all the notable and reliability standards of Content such as Editorial/Staff, Content Being Neutral, and Non-Promotional will stand as good reference? And that website is also not listed in Perennial_sources. For example Vents Magazine has two websites https://ventsmagazine.com/ and https://ventsmagazine.co.uk/. Unlike Forbes.com and Forbes.com.au these these two websites of Vents Magazine has different logo. Are both Vents Magazine Websites are Credible if they would meet the requirement, or since none of them has Wikipedia page, none of them is reliable? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 00:54, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Having a Wikipedia article or an entry at WP:RSP is not required for reliability. You can read more about the reliability criteria at WP:RS. Both the ventsmagazine sources seem a bit bloggy at first glance. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:51, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the answer @Firefangledfeathers. I get it now. So the content, and story also matters, not the website only or the Author. I have another question, is it really matter that the website has it's own Wikipedia page to be considered notable publication or if a website complies all the notable and reliability standards of Content such as Editorial/Staff, Content Being Neutral, and Non-Promotional will stand as good reference? And that website is also not listed in Perennial_sources. For example Vents Magazine has two websites https://ventsmagazine.com/ and https://ventsmagazine.co.uk/. Unlike Forbes.com and Forbes.com.au these these two websites of Vents Magazine has different logo. Are both Vents Magazine Websites are Credible if they would meet the requirement, or since none of them has Wikipedia page, none of them is reliable? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 00:54, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Mashable is marginally reliable, and the notes say to take it case by case. That particular article looks pretty non-independent. It reads at a glance like it was written by the subject's PR team. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 23:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you so much @Firefangledfeathers. There is another similar situation but on a different website. As per Perennial_sources Mashable Non-Sponsored Content is fine for Notability. If we look at https://nl.mashable.com/entrepreneurs/9202/tomas-gorny-from-humble-beginnings-to-customer-experience-innovator it shows Author: Redactie. When I searched Wikipedia, I found the URL: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/redactie that says it means Editorial Staff. Is that correct, or I am understanding this as Editorial/Staff reporter and this is not the case? A publication like this on nl.mashable.com would be considered as Notable and Reliable? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 21:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Usually when we say that something is "editorial", we mean that it is an opinion piece, often one authored by the editorial board of the outlet itself. This seems like a non-opinion news piece. Yes, it's clear that Field is a staff writer and not a contributor. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. I have another question regarding the same. If you look at the forbes.com.au homepage in the image https://i.postimg.cc/pXFNSv0c/image.png it shows an article with title "From Canva to Clove: AI recipe startup cooks up $4m raise" and on homepage it shows "By Shivaune Field Forbes Staff" but when we click on the article https://www.forbes.com.au/news/entrepreneurs/from-canva-to-clove-ai-recipe-startup-cooks-up-4m-raise/ it only shows her name. So this will be considered as Editorial since it was a staff member or no? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
[edit]
Hello, I'm Novem Linguae. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/January 2024/Participants have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:51, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Novem Linguae, Thanks for the feedback. Can you please let me know which one have been undone, so I can look at them? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 19:24, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- I got it now. My mistake, I thought I need to add pages I am going to edit, and then I realize, no I need to add my username there. So that's why I just undone my own changes. That's all good now. Thanks for the heads up @Novem Linguae IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 19:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- Also I got an invitation on my homepage to participate in January participants, in backlog drives, that's why I clicked there and then added myself. I should not do that? I thought system detected me as a good Wikipedian and offered me a new assignment. If that's not the case, then why I was offered on my homepage to go into this page and add myself in there? @Novem Linguae IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 19:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- Ah interesting. I was wondering why new users keep adding articles to that list. Anyway, when you click on the watchlist notice, it takes people to this page: Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/January 2024#Signing up. The first sentence says
In order to participate, you must have the New Page Reviewer user permission, which can be requested here.
However, you need at least 500 mainspace edits to qualify, so wouldn't be a good fit in this case. Thank you for your interest though. Maybe in a couple months :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:03, 27 December 2023 (UTC)- Yeah that's more clarifying now. May be other users like me also got confused and started doing the same thing I did. By the way when I will complete the 500 edits, what will be the level of my user in terms of privileges, or associations I can get on Wikipedia or I have to request something on some specific pages? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 20:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- You can visit WP:PERM to see the additional permissions that can be applied for. Rollbacker and pending changes reviewer are good ones for newer users. New page patroller and some of the others require more experience. A good gameplan might be to get to around 500 edits (not required, but that should be enough time to build some experience with our policies), then apply for pending changes reviewer. Hope this helps. Happy holidays! –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah that's more clarifying now. May be other users like me also got confused and started doing the same thing I did. By the way when I will complete the 500 edits, what will be the level of my user in terms of privileges, or associations I can get on Wikipedia or I have to request something on some specific pages? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 20:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- Ah interesting. I was wondering why new users keep adding articles to that list. Anyway, when you click on the watchlist notice, it takes people to this page: Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/January 2024#Signing up. The first sentence says
News Story Published Under News Desk is Credible?
[edit]I have seen some News Stories that are published under News Desk I wanted to confirm are those credible sources? I know we Wikipedian consider the Staff Reporter or Editor in Chief as author Credible, but wanted to know if News Desk comes under the same category. Please check the following URL for example as Pak Observer is a Credible News Paper and this News Story of Lawsuit is published under News Desk.
https://pakobserver.net/viceroy-research-sued-for-defamation-fraud-practices-in-us-court/ IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 14:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
| This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
- It's unlikely; I found that exact same story in a half-dozen other news outlets, which indicates a pay-to-print model and unlikely to be fact-checked. You will probably want to find a better source. If you want more help, change the {{help me-helped}} back into a {{help me}}, stop by the Teahouse, or Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 15:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Primefac I got it. What if one story is published in one platform, will that be qualified as Credible Source if all other conditions are met. Also there is a trend that smaller publications/media websites also syndicate or replicate the one news story to increase the content on their website as well, how we will be able to differentiate if the it's pay-to-print model, or it's organic. IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 15:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Primefac Also there are two ways to have a break news out in the media. One is if a Journalist find it out, and other is if it's shared through a News Agency. When News Agency covers the news, News Agency send it to all of their contacts, depending on the region, or category of the news. If one news is being sent or pitched by a News Agency to hundreds of media outlets, there is a possibility that few will pick it up. If we see one news being covered in multiple media outlets, will we always consider it as "Pay-to-Print" regardless if it's an Editorial content? IsrarKazmiSyed (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- WP:RSN is probably the best place to ask about a source. Primefac (talk) 16:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)