Talk:Sisay Leudetmounsone

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Laos (assessed as Low-importance).

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Wikileaks

Leaked diplomatic cables are NOT an appropriate source for statements of fact about the specifics of her role in the government. It'#s a non-authoritative source (not peer reviewed and with no editorial oversight, just one diplomat's conclusion) and published at a controversial and questionable source. If this information is not included in reliable independent secondary sources then it's WP:UNDUE. Guy (help! - typo?) 10:16, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG: Its not controversial to state that she was a member of the LPRP Central Committee. The diplomat's conclusion does not change facts. If we would have included the diplomat's view of Sisay I agree that would not belong here. However, the article is only mentioning a fact. --Ruling party (talk) 11:57, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ruling party, please try to comprehend here.

IF this is both true and significant, it will be covered in another source, which YOU must find.

IF this is not covered in a reliable independent source then it is either an error or not significant.

See? Very, very simple. Guy (help! - typo?) 12:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG: Try to comprehend this. There are barely no English language books or sources that discuss Laotian history 1991–2020. If you also add the fact there are very few active URLs left from 2006 that covers this period in Laos in 2006 it is close to impossible to find it. I have scholarly sources for the 1-7th Central committees and 9th-11th Central Committees but I am unable to find one source - outside of WikiLeaks - that discusses the 8th Central Committee in the English bloody language... --Ruling party (talk) 12:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ruling party, we don't have to reference English language books or websites. You can cite a dead tree book in Laotian if you like. See WP:RS. Guy (help! - typo?) 13:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruling party: if you have sources for her being a member of the 9th and 10th central committees you're welcome to add mention of this to our article. However mention of her being a member of the 8th should stay out until you find a suitable source. Nil Einne (talk) 03:37, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nil Einne: I disagree. WP policy says that WikiLeaks is "generally" not a reliable source and not "always" and states quite clearly that the Wikipedia Community can give specific sources the status of reliability through discussion. --Ruling party (talk) 06:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]