User talk:Wiresite

Welcome!

Hello, Wiresite, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! The Prince (talk) 22:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helpme[edit]

{{helpme}}

If a news source (Yahoo!) has a story that is getting it's information wrong and can only be disputed by a blog post, What is the correct thing to be done?

For example on the Final Fantasy XI#Critical Reaction page there is an incident where a group fought a boss in the game called Pandemonium Warden. They had this attempt for 18 hours. However the article quoted (and most if not all articles about this story) have gotten the information wrong. I can only prove the information is wrong by linking to the group leader's Livejournal where he disputes those stories and a thread on a message board where the original discussion and first mention of the 18 hour fight took place. So my question goes back to what is the correct thing to be done when a news outlet is being quoted and can only be disproved by what Wikipedia calls a Self Published Source.

News outlets sometimes get the story wrong and that is indeed a problem. Another problem is that you can't prove the blog is actually written by the group, and it's therefore not a reliable source. I'd suggest you try to post your question on the WP:VILLAGE and perhaps on WP:RSN as well. I'll keep this helpme request open in case someone else will have better suggestions.

Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 14:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jaakobou —— RyanLupin • (talk) 15:11, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asking on either of those pages is a good idea, but perhaps the information should be considered unverifiable and removed, if it is not an important piece of information. This is just a suggestion though; I am not nearly educated enough in the field of this article (or the article itself) to be able to provide a sure verdict on the information itself. Besides the two above mentioned pages, asking on the article's talk page may be a good idea. Hope I helped. Robert Skyhawk (Talk) 15:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will post my question there as soon as I get those links to the blog/message board. Wiresite (talk) 15:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]