Talk:Archaeological sites destroyed during the Gaza genocide

Reference

This could be useful for a few entries:

Irtapil (talk) 06:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Clarification around tagging

Steven1991, you recently added several tags to this article. Perhaps you could explain what you think the underlying issues are? Richard Nevell (talk) 00:56, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

1.) Several sources are in Arabic. Could reliable and verifiable English translations be provided to support the content (I am not sure who created the article)?

2.) Sources like the PressTV (Iranian state television), Al Jazeera (Qatari state-owned media outlet) etc. have been used, which are not reliable sources on matters associated with the conflict. Same as (1.), it would be great if reliable and verifiable secondary English sources are used in support of the content instead.

3.) (1.) and (2.) are my suggestions as I am not an expert in Middle East archaeology. It is up to you to consider and make any remedies deemed appropriate. Steven1991 (talk) 01:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

@Steven1991: The article history indicates who has contributed to the page. Are non-English sources disallowed?

I have replaced the PressTV reference as an actionable point since the English Wikipedia's guidance is that it is a "propaganda outlet that publishes disinformation, conspiracy theories, antisemitic content", however the statement that Al Jazeera is "not [a] reliable [source] on matters associated with the conflict" does not match the consensus on en.wp which is that "Most editors seem to agree that Al Jazeera English and especially Al Jazeera Arabic are biased sources on the Arab–Israeli conflict". en.wp's Reliable sources guideline suggests that bias does not necessarily equate inaccuracy, so in order to progress what precisely is the problem with how the Al Jazeera sources are used in this article? Richard Nevell (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I see. To clarify, I do not say that non-English sources are not allowed, though for the sake of ensuring that the sources indeed support the content, it would be preferable to have credible English translations. In addition, this is the Simple English Wikipedia, which is functionally independent of the English Wikipedia just as any other Wikipedia sites, so I am not sure if consensuses there are directly applicable to this site. Anyway, I am not an expert in Middle East archaeology, so I guess that any other users specialised in this field may be more suitable to delve into this matter. Steven1991 (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@Steven1991: Google Translate does a creditable job of translating from Arabic to English so that the references used in the article can be checked for verifiability.

While the Simple English Wikipedia is a separate community from en.wp, policy wise it does seem to take some cues from en.wp. (Side note: I see that Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources was created by a sock puppet, which is unfortunate as such a page can be a useful resource.) In lieu of a local guideline or consensus on how to handle particular sources, it seems logical to refer to the practice on en.wp to ensure that assertions about reliability are grounded. Richard Nevell (talk) 23:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)