Hi, Emily!

 

Just to be clear here, is the article about the scientist or about the research 
topic of the scientist? If it is about the scientist, then the issue is one we 
encounter with many academic biographies, the lack of reliable sources about 
the *person*. Their journal articles don’t really contribute to that (beyond 
establishing that they published in a certain topic area).

 

In general, the language of the sources should not matter, but a new 
contributor making a strong claim about something dependent on sources that 
they alone have access to (for whatever reason) will inevitably raise some 
suspicion.

 

While there might be a principle of “assume good faith”, if you have seen 
enough bad behaviour, certain patterns of behaviours emerge that tingle the 
“spider senses” of experienced editors. My “tingle” is that bios written by new 
contributors are often likely to involve conflict-of-interest. 

 

Kerry

 

From: Jack, Emily [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, 9 December 2021 7:44 AM
To: Wikimedia & Libraries <[email protected]>
Subject: [libraries] Question: using Russian sources on English Wikipedia

 

Hi all,

 

This isn’t strictly a libraries question, but I’m sending to this group because 
I appreciate the brain trust here. If there’s somewhere more appropriate to 
post this question, please let me know.

 

A chemistry librarian I know sent this question:

 

“I am trying to help a professor who has written a biography of a fellow 
chemist whose original work was in Russian, starting in the 50’s. My profs 
article has been rejected as not being supported by reliable sources. The 
journals are reliable sources but they just aren’t in English, apparently a 
major sticking point. Some may not be available electronically either. 
Obviously we are looking at the articles and do have access to most in 
translation and most electronic. Reality remains, as we all know, that some are 
just not going to be translated nor available easily online. Is this the norm 
for Wikipedia? One journal they considered non-reliable was Doklady Akademii 
Nauk SSSR. Not exactly an unknown, unreliable source. We can deal with this one 
but has left me wondering about the rules, who decides what is reliable, etc. 
Would appreciate any insight and guidance I can get.”

 

Anyone have insights? I would be grateful!

 

Emily

she/her

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to