Talk:Climate-friendly school
Latest comment: 11 months ago by TomRichomme in topic Removing the banner on the over-reliance on 1 source
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Removing the banner on the over-reliance on 1 source edit
I am removing this template banner about the over-reliance on 1 source as the so-called over-reliance stems from the case studies that are used for the section that exemplifies the article. The user that has created this template banner can simply add more case studieas from further sources if they so desire to. TomRichomme (talk) 15:22, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
- OK, but I've added a POV template in its place as the article is too reliant on UNESCO sources and reflects the organisation's POV as a result. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:05, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have added two new sources for tow more case studies, one from the Europan Commission on Cambodia and one from the Bahrain News Agency for a project in Bahrain. I also removed one case study, Denmark. Is that ok? TomRichomme (talk) 14:29, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
- The fundamental problem is that Wikipedia articles shouldn't include case studies - they belong in essays but not encyclopedia entries. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- So a wikipedia article should never cite real world examples of how a subject functions? Is that written somewhere in a wikipedia rulebook or is that simply your personal opinion of what a wikipedia article should be?
- If we take out the sections about the countries that have implemented these climate-friendly schools, would it be ok? TomRichomme (talk) 08:17, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Articles can incorporate discussion of examples, but their selection should be based on secondary sources and it should be clear that that's the case. For example, if author X uses school Y as an example, we should write something like "According to author X, school Y is an example of a climate-friendly school", or if author A gives a list of examples, "Author A lists schools B, C and D as examples". Otherwise, we're getting into original research territory. It seems that most of the "case studies" here come from UNESCO, but that's not made clear with in-text attribution. Also, examples shouldn't start like "May Kimleang is a 16-year-old student enrolled in grade 10 at Preah Kou Higher Secondary School in Stung Treng province, Cambodia" - that's way too journalistic a style. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:56, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ok so I have deleted the examples from the UNESCO report and rewritten slightly the Cambodia section, can the banner be removed? TomRichomme (talk) 09:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- I wasn't suggesting that the examples from UNESCO should be removed, but that it needed to be made clearer which secondary source the selection of examples was based on (I think it's more clear if we keep the UNESCO examples and preface them with "According to UNESCO, the following schools are examples of climate-friendly schools..."). For the banner to be removed, we need to introduce material from a broader range of sources, not necessarily remove the UNESCO-sourced content. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:33, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ok so I simply begin every paragraph/example with "According to UNESCO" and it will be ok? TomRichomme (talk) 09:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- No, I think the section should start with a statement such as that, so that it's clear that the list of examples comes from UNESCO. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ok I added a little sentence under the section "Climate-friendly Schools" section, does it need to be longer or is it ok? TomRichomme (talk) 12:42, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- It's OK but this has made me realise that the sources about Bahrain and Cambodia don't actually use the term "climate-friendly school", so I don't think we can use them as examples. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:31, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- I mean yes, but it is the same topic, especially the Cambodia one, no? Is it really bad that it does not specifically use the term? Because i have tried my best to find good examples and this all i have been able to come up with... TomRichomme (talk) 15:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- It feels like a breach of WP:SYNTH to me. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- ok i deleted the sections on Bahrain and Cambodia. TomRichomme (talk) 08:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- It feels like a breach of WP:SYNTH to me. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- I mean yes, but it is the same topic, especially the Cambodia one, no? Is it really bad that it does not specifically use the term? Because i have tried my best to find good examples and this all i have been able to come up with... TomRichomme (talk) 15:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- It's OK but this has made me realise that the sources about Bahrain and Cambodia don't actually use the term "climate-friendly school", so I don't think we can use them as examples. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:31, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ok I added a little sentence under the section "Climate-friendly Schools" section, does it need to be longer or is it ok? TomRichomme (talk) 12:42, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- No, I think the section should start with a statement such as that, so that it's clear that the list of examples comes from UNESCO. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ok so I simply begin every paragraph/example with "According to UNESCO" and it will be ok? TomRichomme (talk) 09:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- I wasn't suggesting that the examples from UNESCO should be removed, but that it needed to be made clearer which secondary source the selection of examples was based on (I think it's more clear if we keep the UNESCO examples and preface them with "According to UNESCO, the following schools are examples of climate-friendly schools..."). For the banner to be removed, we need to introduce material from a broader range of sources, not necessarily remove the UNESCO-sourced content. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:33, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ok so I have deleted the examples from the UNESCO report and rewritten slightly the Cambodia section, can the banner be removed? TomRichomme (talk) 09:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Articles can incorporate discussion of examples, but their selection should be based on secondary sources and it should be clear that that's the case. For example, if author X uses school Y as an example, we should write something like "According to author X, school Y is an example of a climate-friendly school", or if author A gives a list of examples, "Author A lists schools B, C and D as examples". Otherwise, we're getting into original research territory. It seems that most of the "case studies" here come from UNESCO, but that's not made clear with in-text attribution. Also, examples shouldn't start like "May Kimleang is a 16-year-old student enrolled in grade 10 at Preah Kou Higher Secondary School in Stung Treng province, Cambodia" - that's way too journalistic a style. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:56, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- The fundamental problem is that Wikipedia articles shouldn't include case studies - they belong in essays but not encyclopedia entries. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have added two new sources for tow more case studies, one from the Europan Commission on Cambodia and one from the Bahrain News Agency for a project in Bahrain. I also removed one case study, Denmark. Is that ok? TomRichomme (talk) 14:29, 6 June 2023 (UTC)