Talk:Mediterranean and Middle East theatre of World War II/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Duplicate references

Some of the books in the bibliography are duplicated. Is this an error?Keith-264 (talk) 22:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure they are duplicates, and not different volumes? Hamish59 (talk) 23:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Ahem!Keith-264 (talk) 06:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Raw film footage of war should be allowed regardless of its origins.

Biased or opinionated sources See also: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view § Bias in sources and Wikipedia:Neutrality of Sources Shortcut: WP:BIASED Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject. Common sources of bias include political, financial, religious, philosophical, or other beliefs. While a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking. Editors should also consider whether the bias makes it appropriate to use in-text attribution to the source, as in "Feminist Betty Friedan wrote that...", "According to the Marxist economist Harry Magdoff...," or "Conservative Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater believed that...".AnnalesSchool (talk) 21:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Italian propaganda film

I have reverted this twice. I do not want to fall afoul of WP:3RR. The presented film is Fascist Italian propaganda and is not a reliable source.Hamish59 (talk) 22:15, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Hamish, I think you are getting confused about what is a reliable source. The footage has not been used as a source for anything. Where in the article has it been cited or referenced.? It is simply a link to a YouTube clip that is freely available on the internet. Now, if I had quoted the footage and used it as evidence for an argument or point of view within the article, then that would constitute unreliability on the grounds that it was created as war time propaganda and therefore, violates the Wiki rule on biased sources. But even biased sources still have their place as long as the reader is made aware that it is inherently biased. Let's give the readers the benefit of the doubt here, shall we? Most readers are intelligent enough to realize that war time footage by any side, is biased. Besides Hamish, it's in Italian and most English readers wouldn't understand it anyway! It's the exciting visuals that they would be more interested in. You are free to include British and American footage if you like. I watch them regularly. As a reader, I know I would appreciate a link to them.AnnalesSchool (talk) 10:04, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

To avoid fragments conversations, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Italian war time footage, advise needed. Hamish59 (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

CE

Did a CE which got a bit elaborate. Happy to discuss.Keith-264 (talk) 10:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Theatres

Although the article uses British English, there are several places in which direct quotes of an American historian or the official US name for the theater occur. I have changed these instances (only) from "theatre" to "theater." --Lineagegeek (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Bugger! I left them in. ;O) Some more sections could stand a severe pruning due to repetition and long-windednessKeith-264 (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Can we have the campaignboxes closeable?Keith-264 (talk) 16:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I can agree about th long windedness, it was various sections of duplicated articles - iirc - bolted together to show a campaign by campaign narrative that was then reorganized into a more chronological flow. Cutting, chopping, adding, and sourcing has been on the to do list!EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I know that feelin'. Apropos the campaignboxes, it's Wiki not us apparently.Keith-264 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Infobox

I think footnotes in the infobox are pointless when its contents are a summary of the article, the content of the footnotes ought to be moved to it. Keith-264 (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)