Talk:Silk Route Museum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Chinese references Can anyone help with references written in Chinese? —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])


Can someone clarify the location? Is it in Jiayuguan (pass)? Also, is the museum actually built yet, or is it planned? ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

This article makes claims without any reliable secondary sources.[edit]

Material was added with no sources at all. Please see WP:RS. I am removing the unsourced material. KatieBoundary (talk) 13:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

The material has been restored. Unsourced material should only be removed if it is controversial. Surely most of the material in this article is not controversial. Information such as the museum's location and their collections can reliably be garnered from the museum's own publications (we can presume the museum won't lie about their location!). Any claims to the significance of the collections should be sourced, but the existence of the collections can be reasonably verified from the external links provided. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:37, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Please stop making up your own policies like saying "Unsourced material should only be removed if it is controversial". This is not a policy. WP:RS is a policy. Please stop violating Wikipedia policies. I will make a notice at Admin notice boards if you do not remove the unsourced content you added. KatieBoundary (talk) 13:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Saw this while doing RCP and I have to agree with Katie here. Any material that is unsourced can be removed at any time (read the source tags). That being said, Katie, removing 90% of the article due to it being unsourced is also contrary to standard practice. Rather than removing large sections of the content why not try and source it? Most of the material here is descriptive of what is in the museum and its location, not exactly material that is in dire need of sourcing lest it face removal :-) ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 14:06, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I already provided a source for the information before she started templating me for editwarring. The material removed was uncontroversial and easily sourced, yet Katie insists on dismissing all my point with "It's a phony corporate shell" or other such unfounded accusations.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 14:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok I have done some preliminary research and I have found a source for some of the original materials here and [1] here. Katie, I suggest rewriting the article (which I am happy to do) and adding a controversies section :-) ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 14:18, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Your "preliminary research" violates WP:OR. Your sources violate WP:RS. KatieBoundary (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I have rewritten the entire, article, sourced it and included the material brought up by Katie. I am not very good at the reference templates so if someone could support me by cleaning that part up that would be awesome! :-) ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 14:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Solarra made up an entire article using no reliable secondary source whatsoever. KatieBoundary (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

This article does not contain a single source meeting WP:Notabiity or WP:RS[edit]

This article does not contain a single source meeting WP:Notabiity or WP:RS. Why? KatieBoundary (talk) 15:06, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Merge with Yasheng Group[edit]

After spending over an hour attempting to find a reliable source I am prone to agree with you. I suggest we redirect this to Yasheng Group as until such a source is found WP:Notability frankly isn't met. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 16:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
[ There] are several unrelated non-user-generated sources.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Also, why would it be redirected to that article when you haven't established a clear link to the group from the museum. Oppose --Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
One small problem, the Silk Route Museum and the Jiuquan Museum are two separate museums, no where do I find that 'Jiuquan Museum' is an alternative name for 'Silk Route Museum' not even on the Silk Route Museum's website. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 16:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I removed those links.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
The link between the two entities can be found here. As for the content on the Yasheng page itself, that should be discussed there. This page should either be deleted or merged, as it of itself doesn't meet WP:Notability or WP:RS.♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 17:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
That's not a link - both are sponsors to the same organisation. Also could you please sign your posts?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:53, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Of course :-) Anyways, I changed the redirect proposal to an AFD, as the WP:Notability and WP:RS arguments still apply. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 17:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Which leaves open the question as to how so many Wikipedia editors can team up to oppose WP:RS, writing an article entirely fabricated from a self published website. KatieBoundary (talk) 19:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
LOL, the "source" link to an advertisement at a tourist site shows a picture of an airport tower for the museum. What nonsense. That's what happens when WP:RS is utterly ignored. KatieBoundary (talk) 19:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Which one, I will be happy to remove it? Also could you link to a page that has these "unbelievable" fossils etc. as I have been unable to find them.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 19:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Gilderien, re "Which one, I will be happy to remove it?" - There is not a single reliable source cited for any of the content. Please "happily" remove it. Please stop ignoring WP:RS. 20:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Primary sources have their place, and I am not ignoring RS. I asked for the specific example with the airport.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


The "Sponsors" section of this article makes some imflammatory claims about the Yasheng Group based on very questionable sources.

  • This source refers to a law suit between Rajat Gupta and an organization known as New Silk Route LLC, a private equity firm that has no apparent ties to Yasheng Group or the Silk Route Museum.
  • This reference is a Form 8-K filing of Yasheng Group disclosing that they paid a settlement to a complainant without disclosing the nature of the dispute or admitting any guilt in the matter.

Since neither source actually verifies that Yasheng are involved in securities fraud (or even that they have been accused of such), I do not believe it belongs in the article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Dan, on the first source you are correct, there is no tie between the two and I have removed the source. As for the second source, there are several parts of the filing which detail the allegations made against the Yasheng Group, that coupled with the sources Katie has supplied warrants inclusion as a allegation of fraud. The text does not say the fraud occured, merely that allegations exist. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 16:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Addition: This source establishes the accusation tied to the 8-k filing. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 16:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I've reverted the addition of those references because they appear to violate WP:NPOV. Neither of the previous or recent sources make any direct claim against the museum in question. Allegations of fraud against associated acts require reliable sources documenting their connection for inclusion, else this is just guilt by association hearsay. Feel free to discuss allegations of company fraud in Yasheng Group if you so feel inclined. Funny Pika! 15:39, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Violations of WP:Advert, WP:Notability, WP:RS[edit]

  • This article violates WP:Notability. There is no reliable secondary source establishing notability.
  • This article violates WP:RS. There is not a single reliable source, primary secondary, or otherwise, supporting anything in it.

Unless someone replies in a meaningful way, I will enforce these policies. KatieBoundary (talk) 16:12, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

How have we not already replied in a meaningful way? How do you intend to enforce these policies? You have already violated 3RR and none of us have reported it but if you revert again I will.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Some questions[edit]

  • How can their website have photos of geological and fossil specimens that are of world shaking significance, yet none of us in the profession have ever heard of these important discoveries?
  • What is the address of the supposed museum?
  • Can the museum be seen with a Google Earth fly-over - given the enormous square footage they advertise.
  • Why has no architectural review commented on a building of such enormity?
  • Why does the government of China not promote it? KatieBoundary (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)