Talk:Sons of the Revolution#Source/Site out-of-date
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|
{{WikiProject Organizations|importance=Low|needs-image=yes}}
{{WikiProject United States History|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Genealogy |importance=Low}}
}}
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to {{plural:2|one external link|2 external links}} on Sons of the Revolution. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=706459898 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071202124434/http://sill-www.army.mil/awards/KNOXTROPHY.pdf to http://sill-www.army.mil/awards/KNOXTROPHY.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080821032215/http://wcbstv.com:80/topstories/Sons.of.Revolution.2.784846.html to http://www.wcbstv.com/topstories/Sons.of.Revolution.2.784846.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:56, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Society of '83 connection
[https://academic.oup.com/jsh/article-abstract/37/4/883/947269?redirectedFrom=fulltext This academic paper] suggests a connection to the "Society of '83", or that this was the organization's original title, named in honor of Evacuation Day (New York). A [https://www.nytimes.com/1884/01/02/archives/organizing-the-society-of-83-the-sentiments-which-the-day-aroused.html NYT article] from 1884 is the only other reference I could find to the "Society of '83", however, and that makes it seem like a less direct connection.--Pharos (talk) 16:24, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Number of members
I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sons_of_the_Revolution&type=revision&diff=878758214&oldid=871413299&diffmode=source restored] the number of members [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sons_of_the_Revolution&type=revision&diff=866226931&oldid=865170860&diffmode=source deleted] by [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/72.218.185.31 72.218.185.31] without comment that was recently added by {{u|Brotester}}. I'm not sure why the IP decided to delete it. Although the source is WP:PRIMARY, it should be reliable for determining the number of members of the org. --David Tornheim (talk) 19:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Source/Site out-of-date
Deleted number of members by {{u|Brotester}} due to source out of date by +/- four years. See http://www.sr1776.org/officers.php for updated officers list but with no new general president message yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.218.185.31 (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
:Seems like a reasonable concern, but would also like to hear from Brotester (and any other editors following this discussion). In future, make sure to put reasons like that in the WP:EDITSUMMARY, or say "See talk page" and explain it in more detail on talk page--as you now have.
:To avoid having the autosign bot sign your messages, end your message with 4 tildes (
:I just checked the wayback machine for the President's message: [https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sr1776.org/message.php here]
:That message was placed sometimes between [https://web.archive.org/web/20150927075441/http://www.sr1776.org/message.php 27 September 2015] and [https://web.archive.org/web/20151214202153/http://www.sr1776.org/message.php 14 December 2015]. There were no archives between those two snapshots. So I have put in the date 2015 and the archive snapshot. --David Tornheim (talk) 00:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC):
::David Tornheim "Membership" varies and is used to support an "advertising platform" see https://www.ana.net/membership. By your own research, the information added by {{u|Brotester}} was not verified and "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor" Wikipedia:Verifiability. Is it reasonable to include the information when it goes against one of the Wikipedia:Five pillars and after both of us concluded that it (Membership) was not verified before being placed on the page? Regards.72.218.185.31 (talk) 16:02, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
:::According to our policy on verifiability, the key way to make something verifiable is to provide a citation to a reliable source. A citation has been provided. The question you seem to be asking is whether the organization's reporting on its membership is reliable or not. I believe it is. Even if another source cites the membership==as say the Washington Post does as a source the ACLU's membership==my guess is that the reporter at the Washington Post got the number from the organization. Since membership lists are often private, I do not see how you can get an accurate membership number without consulting the organization. I will post your concern to WP:RS/N--that way we can get another opinion. --David Tornheim (talk) 17:28, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Since "Membership" as a heading was added; it's addition, the broader implications for including "Membership" in a Wikipedia page and whether or not it has a verifiable citation become the central point. The page was edited by {{u|Brotester}} on 18 October 2018. This is three years after the archived citation David Tornheim included from Wayback. I believe the best course of action is to remove "Membership" and be patient for a more current citation. Regards.72.218.185.31 (talk) 19:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
::This was a few months ago but from what I recall, the source in question was not only the most recent but likely the only available reference I could find of the membership number in question.Brotester (talk) 00:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Welcome to the discussion {{u|Brotester}}. My original point and the reason why I deleted "Membership" was that the source cited was from "President's Message" which David Tornheim confirmed was from 2015. There is a new President see http://www.sr1776.org/officers.php Since "Membership" was not originally on the page and the new President will want to compose a new "President's Message" I believe it best to remove "Membership" and see if a more current citation becomes available in the future. Regards. 72.218.185.31 (talk) 03:36, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
::::Based on discussion at WP:RS/N (link below), I have added the membership number to the WP:BODY of the article.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sons_of_the_Revolution&type=revision&diff=879007817&oldid=878903186&diffmode=source] --David Tornheim (talk) 11:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
:::::I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sons_of_the_Revolution&type=revision&diff=879030938&oldid=879007817&diffmode=source deleted] the mention in the InfoBox based on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&type=revision&diff=879030327&oldid=879027429&diffmode=source this reasoning] at WP:RS/N. I would still support keeping it in, but I am deleting because of the mixed messages. --David Tornheim (talk) 15:04, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
=Notice=
I submitted the question about the reliability of the source here:
:Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_256#Membership_number_from_the_organization
--David Tornheim (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)