83:
848:
The Daily Mail co-sponsored with the UK Govt a youth business awards program for several years in the 2000s. The Daily Mail was one of the main resources for the award program, the other websites no longer exist. The Daily Mail retains some of the last details about the awards, such as its history,
735:
There must be some occasions where a prohibited source is suitable for being used when the intent is citation. I understand an outright ban on linking illegal websites and using secondary sources in order to avoid direct users to something prohibitive. I do not understand an outright block of a URL
852:
While I was editing the wiki of an award recipient, I externally linked The Daily Mail's summary page for an award year, as there was no wiki for the award program. External linking in lieu of using a red internal link is rather common to ensure readers can access details without clutter an
873:
The Daily Mail puts out a press release it is launching a talk show formatted show, can
Knowledge cite the press release or anything else The Daily Mail writes about their new talk show? Or does a source have to come via a non-censored website disseminating the same information?
744:, so why not place a warning tag that are plentiful on numerous wikis proceed with caution? Or just delink? Or other review? The edit removed preexisting and substantiated facts just because it shared a sentence with a link going to a site not well-regarded as a news source.
880:
If reputable sources report on The Daily Mail while using information provided by The Daily Mail regarding itself, does that affect the reliability of the reputable source? If not, then how can The Daily Mail be prohibited to being a source for at least its own activities?
866:
This raises questions about when a primary source comes from a website being censored by
Knowledge. Does Knowledge need a secondary news source to republish the same information provided by a censored website in order for it to be used as a reference?
756:
in use as a cited reference but the removed link (and sentence) was not used to substantiate any facts on the wiki - it was in the role as an outside link providing an official description and overview of the defunct award program behind the award
801:
I appreciate your time and response. I'm not yet comfortable with the
Wikipedian lexicon, and I've tried what hopefully was sufficient to illustrate the issue and avoid confusion or misunderstandings. Thank you. (BTW: I am not Shana Dowdeswell)
838:
I'm not sure the notification within my Talk page reply was done correctly. Per your message on my Talk page/edits, there remains some questions. Its detailed, as to avoid misunderstandings. It seemed too long to put onto your talk page.
677:
is controversial and information about him tends to be either provided by himself in self-promotion or his detractors. Its for this reason I believed it necessary to provide access to an official overview about what the
494:
award program, and was considering creating a wiki page for it as information and its winners is becoming scarce. It was not an insignificant event, its ceremony was attended by UK officials, such as the
561:
Could you provide guidance on what to do if a prohibited site is the primary website or source regarding its own statements, activities and associations? (i.e. press release, contest, job announcement,
856:
The external link was removed along with the removal of key information regarding the recipient; facts with preexisting citations from non-Daily Mail resources. These facts seem to suffer from
657:
won, are found incomplete, incorrect or insignificant. Overall, sources tended to include a lot of opinions, speculation and dead links. Ultimately, a lot of the original source material is to
373:
Do not add articles to acronym or initials disambiguation pages unless the person or entity is widely known by that name (in which case it should be stated in the linked article).
863:
As The Daily Mail cannot be used in
Knowledge citations, or any other reference, then no informative section or page can be made for the UK's Enterprising Young Brits awards.
919:. While the Daily Mail seems to have been involved with the "Enterprising Young Brits" award, ABOUTSELF does not apply here. So, yes, we need to use reliable sources instead.
785:
Maybe its already been voted on that it is okay to have incomplete and/or missing historical records for some matters in order to maintain a censorship block on some sites:
145:
625:
did not continue the awards much long after. The UK government did not maintain documentation regarding operational information. It appears they sent inquires to
849:
what the awards are for, and participation. The Daily Mail is the only active, official resource (along with a subsidary that has kept some promotional pages).
796:
You seem informed about these matters. Has a problem like this come up before and how was the resolution? If you don't know, where would I go to find an answer?
915:
Hello
Roxanne, thanks for your reply. As you rightly say, we can, in rare cases, use a deprecated source as a source for information about itself – per
637:
won an award but they do not detail what the award significance is or how someone can win one. There has been speculation by other sources, whereas
344:
450:
Hi Robby. I guess its taken me about a year to figure out how to ask several questions regarding what was the edit above. Even when I was new to
86:
or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the
57:
773:
page did not need a detailed description of the award program in order to understand his history. Had I added a section about the award on
196:
825:(This was added to Robby's talk page, including copy here as an archive) Original: Roxanne-snowden (talk) 06:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
130:
673:, or other the individual winners, or the ceremony attendees. There's little info on the award program and award types in much detail.
168:
877:
If a celebrity published their autobiography on The Daily Mail, would editors be barred from citing the original publication page?
535:
had won. The event hasn't been in the news for a long while and other news sources have purged most of the coverage they did have.
462:
and other contested news/sites being used as a citation. I believe the following situation is an exception for multiple reasons.
82:
777:
wiki to an internal link to instead, it wouldn't be possible to cite the EYB awards properly without including links involving
173:
891:
but highlights parts of the broader inquiry. (there is no connection to a 'Shana' and uncertain why you used this name).
191:
287:
95:
550:
was the main sponsor and coordinator for the awards and assisted in the events, ceremonies, nominations and promotion.
593:
becomes publicly significant with his involvement in the award program and he is a notable people to win an award.
539:
assisted in the applications/nominations process and providing official announcements as part of its coordination.
470:
as there will be times when a website will be a primary source about itself; especially with old content. As it is,
884:
Do you know what the answers are to these sorts of scenarios, or the exceptions, or how to find out if you do not?
265:
246:
555:
Can you advise on what should be done instead of using The Daily Mail for topics related to the EYB awards? *
343:
article quickly and easily. For that reason, they have guidelines that are different from articles. From the
309:
91:
687:
Is there a contingency in place for using The Daily Mail - or any other boycotted news sources or websites?
220:
135:
924:
898:
833:
423:
270:
899:
User_talk:Robby.is.on#When_The_Daily_Mail_Sponsors_&_Govt_Award_Program_for_Youth_&_Other_Tales
834:
User_talk:Robby.is.on#When_The_Daily_Mail_Sponsors_&_Govt_Award_Program_for_Youth_&_Other_Tales
363:
Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
358:
Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry that mentions the title being disambiguated
901:
804:
392:
313:
77:
50:
17:
916:
770:
758:
674:
670:
654:
634:
590:
532:
483:
415:
411:
276:
235:
65:
382:
282:
230:
163:
125:
920:
444:
437:
419:
87:
696:
has a press release they will professionally translate all archives into 20 languages? or
894:
Your time is valuable, thank you in advance for reviewing and assisting with the answers.
225:
367:
Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
478:
awards, an award program it coordinated and sponsored for multiple years in the 2000s.
336:
649:
didn't index all the active years/pages. There was no existing wiki about the awards.
860:
by association with the offending link or maybe any association with The Daily Mail.
378:
241:
653:
Personal websites and private blogs (indexed or active), that may discuss the award
609:. The award program no longer operates and hasn't been active in about a decade.
585:. It is a commercial business blog, and appears more controversial to use instead.
140:
370:
Do not insert external links or references - Knowledge is not a business directory
829:
When The Daily Mail
Sponsors & Govt Award Program for Youth & Other Tales
546:
website remains the official legacy source regarding the defunct award program.
928:
909:
812:
704:
editor-in-chief announces a restructuring and will add a co-editor-in-chief? or
427:
400:
386:
321:
99:
25:
507:
awards is mostly lost and sporadically found pages need to be located using
332:
354:
Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
90:. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing!
889:
User_talk:Roxanne-snowden#Daily_Mail_reference_at_Shana_Dowdeswell
841:
User_talk:Roxanne-snowden#Daily_Mail_reference_at_Shana_Dowdeswell
76:
on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to
897:
Original : Roxanne-snowden (talk) 06:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
740:
There seems to be some a bot that can check edits for the use of
351:
Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
888:
840:
391:
Leschnei, thank you for these guidelines. Much appreciated.
466:
I had not assumed there would be a complete blackout on
60:
to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out
887:
The above is not the same as my Talk page reply to you
621:
department and later ended funding the award program.
515:
coordinated the award program in conjunction with the
288:
Discover what's going on in the
Wikimedia community
645:The charity's website is now unassociated and The
312:, Thank you for these references and the welcome.
665:There is scarce news coverage - other than one
486:I gathered historical info regarding the former
629:and the charity to get info when operational.
207:
112:
42:
8:
761:received in-lieu of there being no existing
231:Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
597:The award program was coordinated with the
331:Please note that disambiguation pages like
718:The above could be probable additions for
605:, done via a (now-defunct) charity called
410:Hi. The Daily Mail reference you added at
339:are meant to help readers find a specific
474:is the remaining official source for the
730:sources in order to provide a reference?
713:hosts a vacation raffle for subscribers?
406:Daily Mail reference at Shana Dowdeswell
788:A throw the baby out with the bathwater
345:Knowledge:Disambiguation dos and don'ts
726:Are editors dependent on finding only
641:provides an overview and description.
454:, I did read up information regarding
249:– a Wizard to help you create articles
573:There's an active website w/ ties to
414:needs to be replaced or removed. See
7:
633:There are other sources validating
527:was THE main news coverage for the
432:——————————————————————————————————
14:
781:The same if it had its own page.
519:through a separate (now defunct)
81:
929:08:07, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
910:06:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
813:04:19, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
1:
736:or resource name otherwise.
238:, for more advanced questions
136:The five pillars of Knowledge
108:
38:
34:
428:18:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
146:Intuitive guide to Knowledge
78:sign your name on talk pages
48:Hello, Roxanne-snowden, and
599:U.K. Government / Dept BERR
443:Response and questions for:
945:
221:Frequently asked questions
197:Simplified Manual of Style
523:created for the purpose.
401:13:07, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
387:11:59, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
322:13:19, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
192:How to develop an article
131:Contributing to Knowledge
100:07:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
26:18:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
905:
822:———————————————————————
808:
583:Enterprising Young Brits
529:Enterprising Young Brits
505:Enterprising Young Brits
476:Enterprising Young Brits
396:
317:
21:
669:affiliated- focuses on
169:Directories and indexes
155:Finding your way around
601:(merged agency) &
16:This is my talk page.
51:Welcome to Knowledge!
327:Disambiguation pages
174:Department directory
771:Simon James Stevens
759:Simon James Stevens
682:award program was.
675:Simon James Stevens
671:Simon James Stevens
661:- or - each other.
655:Simon James Stevens
635:Simon James Stevens
591:Simon James Stevens
579:"thisismoney/co/uk"
533:Simon James Stevens
484:Simon James Stevens
412:Simon James Stevens
277:Knowledge etiquette
589:The life story of
581:that promoted the
503:Details about the
310:CommanderWaterford
271:Join a WikiProject
141:How to edit a page
92:CommanderWaterford
88:edit summary field
64:below, ask at the
58:your contributions
853:associated page.
752:rules prohibited
307:
306:
303:
302:
299:
298:
295:
294:
204:
203:
164:Table of contents
107:
106:
936:
441:
418:. Kind regards,
266:Community Portal
257:How you can help
208:
183:Editing articles
113:
109:
85:
74:
73:
43:
39:
35:
944:
943:
939:
938:
937:
935:
934:
933:
902:Roxanne-snowden
845:Short Summary:
831:
805:Roxanne-snowden
779:The Daily Mail.
647:Wayback Machine
617:overhauled the
615:U.K. government
435:
408:
393:Roxanne-snowden
329:
314:Roxanne-snowden
258:
213:
184:
156:
118:
117:Getting started
103:
71:
70:
33:
18:Roxanne-snowden
12:
11:
5:
942:
940:
932:
931:
830:
827:
821:
818:
800:
794:
784:
775:The Daily Mail
768:
765:page for it.
754:The Daily Mail
747:
739:
734:
728:non-Daily Mail
720:The Daily Mail
717:
711:The Daily Mail
702:The Daily Mail
694:The Daily Mail
691:
685:
664:
659:The Daily Mail
652:
644:
639:The Daily Mail
632:
627:The Daily Mail
623:The Daily Mail
612:
607:Make Your Mark
603:The Daily Mail
596:
588:
575:The Daily Mail
571:
570:
566:
559:
553:
548:The Daily Mail
544:The Daily Mail
542:
537:The Daily Mail
525:The Daily Mail
513:The Daily Mail
502:
497:Prime Minister
488:U.K government
482:While editing
481:
472:The Daily Mail
468:The Daily Mail
465:
460:The Daily Mail
407:
404:
375:
374:
371:
368:
365:
360:
355:
352:
337:Richard Rivers
328:
325:
305:
304:
301:
300:
297:
296:
293:
292:
291:
290:
285:
279:
273:
268:
260:
259:
256:
253:
252:
251:
250:
247:Article Wizard
244:
239:
233:
228:
223:
215:
214:
211:
205:
202:
201:
200:
199:
194:
186:
185:
182:
179:
178:
177:
176:
171:
166:
158:
157:
154:
151:
150:
149:
148:
143:
138:
133:
128:
120:
119:
116:
105:
104:
56:Thank you for
46:
32:
29:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
941:
930:
926:
922:
918:
914:
913:
912:
911:
907:
903:
900:
895:
892:
890:
885:
882:
878:
875:
871:
868:
864:
861:
859:
854:
850:
846:
843:
842:
836:
835:
828:
826:
823:
819:
816:
815:
814:
810:
806:
798:
797:
792:
790:
789:
782:
780:
776:
772:
766:
764:
760:
755:
751:
745:
743:
742:dailymail/com
737:
732:
731:
727:
723:
721:
715:
714:
712:
706:
705:
703:
697:
695:
689:
688:
683:
681:
676:
672:
668:
662:
660:
656:
650:
648:
642:
640:
636:
630:
628:
624:
620:
616:
610:
608:
604:
600:
594:
592:
586:
584:
580:
576:
569:
568:
567:
564:
563:
557:
556:
551:
549:
545:
540:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
517:UK Government
514:
510:
506:
500:
498:
493:
489:
485:
479:
477:
473:
469:
463:
461:
457:
453:
448:
447:
446:
439:
433:
430:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
405:
403:
402:
398:
394:
389:
388:
384:
380:
372:
369:
366:
364:
361:
359:
356:
353:
350:
349:
348:
346:
342:
338:
334:
326:
324:
323:
319:
315:
311:
289:
286:
284:
280:
278:
274:
272:
269:
267:
264:
263:
262:
261:
255:
254:
248:
245:
243:
240:
237:
236:The Help Desk
234:
232:
229:
227:
224:
222:
219:
218:
217:
216:
210:
209:
206:
198:
195:
193:
190:
189:
188:
187:
181:
180:
175:
172:
170:
167:
165:
162:
161:
160:
159:
153:
152:
147:
144:
142:
139:
137:
134:
132:
129:
127:
124:
123:
122:
121:
115:
114:
111:
110:
102:
101:
97:
93:
89:
84:
79:
75:
67:
63:
59:
54:
53:
52:
45:
44:
41:
40:
37:
36:
30:
28:
27:
23:
19:
917:WP:ABOUTSELF
896:
893:
886:
883:
879:
876:
872:
869:
865:
862:
857:
855:
851:
847:
844:
837:
832:
824:
820:
817:
803:
799:
795:
793:
787:
786:
783:
778:
774:
767:
762:
753:
749:
746:
741:
738:
733:
729:
725:
724:
719:
716:
710:
708:
707:
701:
699:
698:
693:
690:
686:
684:
679:
666:
663:
658:
651:
646:
643:
638:
631:
626:
622:
618:
614:
611:
606:
602:
598:
595:
587:
582:
578:
574:
572:
565:
560:
558:
554:
552:
547:
543:
541:
536:
531:awards that
528:
524:
520:
516:
512:
508:
504:
501:
496:
491:
487:
480:
475:
471:
467:
464:
459:
455:
451:
449:
442:
434:
431:
416:WP:DAILYMAIL
409:
390:
376:
362:
357:
347:you should:
340:
330:
308:
212:Getting help
126:Introduction
80:by clicking
69:
62:Getting Help
61:
55:
49:
47:
15:
921:Robby.is.on
509:archive.org
458:opinion on
445:Robby.is.on
438:Robby.is.on
420:Robby.is.on
377:Thank you.
72:{{Help me}}
68:, or place
870:Examples:
791:decision.
667:Daily Mail
490:sponsored
242:Help pages
226:Cheatsheet
763:Knowledge
456:Knowledge
452:Knowledge
281:Practice
66:help desk
709:What if
700:What if
692:What if
379:Leschnei
341:existing
333:Big Tuna
283:civility
722:wiki.
577:called
521:charity
275:Follow
31:Welcome
858:guilt
562:etc.)
925:talk
906:talk
809:talk
769:The
750:Wiki
748:The
619:BERR
613:The
424:talk
397:talk
383:talk
335:and
318:talk
96:talk
22:talk
680:EYB
492:EYB
927:)
908:)
811:)
511:.
499:.
426:)
399:)
385:)
320:)
98:)
24:)
923:(
904:(
807:(
440::
436:@
422:(
395:(
381:(
316:(
94:(
20:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
