12

I continue to believe this is a useful discussion - I'm anxious about "discussion" in answers. I'm going to try to redirect to what I think is the consensus. The Question is about community criteria for referencing religious sources. I assert: If there is such a criteria, it is not clearly articulated. The site would be stronger if such a criteria were ...


11

I think there is a difference between basing a question on a movie, and citing a movie as a source. I would take issue with your assertion that "There are many historical movies which show exactly the way events happened in the past ...". I suspect that there are probably far fewer than you think. Hollywood is known as "The Dream Factory", not "The History ...


9

I'm hoping to get answers (possibly a community wiki) that clarify the community stance on when (if ever) it is appropriate to refer to religious texts... IMO it is appropriate to use religious texts as sources if they qualify as good historical sources. If they don't you're going to need good historical sources to back up their claims. Whether it's a ...


5

Actual documentaries would be OK. For Neda and Eyes on the Prize are great sources for the topics they cover. This is particularly true for events from the 20th century or later where a lot of primary sources are either audio or visual or both. There really isn't a better way to present such material other than in a documentary movie. Of course the same ...


4

Why are you worried that it won't apply to non-offensive pseudohistorical answers? Just downvote those. Deletion should be used for offensive or rule-breaking post, not as a tool against incorrectness. Similarly, lack of citations is not a reason for deleting a post. In this case, if you believe the post is offensive, simply flag it as such (i.e. rude and ...


4

I believe a movie is a legitimate source on which to base a question. Any source/reference is better than none. A movie is better than an assertion. That said, any source (movie, wikipedia, secondary or even primary source) is subject to analysis & challenge - that is part of what makes history a science. I am skeptical of the claim "There are ...


4

A movie, particularly one that depicts some romanticized version of an event, shouldn't be the basis of a question IMO, or at least not until you dig deeper and research the topic further. Unless you're watching a documentary (the likes of which Ken Burns makes), assume as a matter of course that scenarists have fiddled with the timeline or the event to ...


3

The analysis above - both the question and the top voted answer - is superlative. The money quote is: I understand why we have a policy against general reference requests, but I do not feel good about just closing such questions. . . MoisheKohan Summary: let's treat this as an X:Y question and fix the question. I think most of the time, we can answer the ...


3

We should not make book recommendations. They rely on the users opinions. Sometimes that might be good, sometimes its bad. Not all our users have 'good' intent. Not all users have equal levels of understanding. None of our users are free from bias. Those of you who have been around a while will have noted how many bad recommendations/sources can appear or be ...


2

Follow-up to Schwern's answer (too long for a comment): It occurs to me that stating "we know <given religious text> is fiction" really gets at the heart of the friction that comes up between historians and religious proponents, especially as a parallel between a religious text and a modern fictional work. There is a fundamental difference between the ...


2

I would be 100% for this proposal if reputation could be taken out of the equation. As is, I worry that SE's reputation system would pervert incentives too much. What Does OP Want From a Recommendation Thread? A list of only the best books. We all know that there are more good history books than there are days left in our lives, so we only want to read ...


2

I believe that we should experiment to determine whether reference requests fit History.se or whether the current opinion that they be rejected is correct. This sounds like an excellent and well thought experiment, that we should conduct, and then review in 6 months in order to finalise policy.


2

I am sympathetic to both side - the need to improve the references and the need to be friendly. We need to strike a balance that includes both. IMHO, the balance has to fall on the side of scholarship. I want to work in a SE where I can learn history without fear of abuse. I prefer that over a friendly discussion site with a history inclination. Let me ...


2

[Let be begin with the customary caveat that what follows is my personal opinion. Please try to disregard any moderator diamond you see next to my name.] I agree that those with sufficient reputation should be more proactive about downvoting, flagging, and voting to close/delete problem posts. This is a community moderated site, and I'd argue that the ...


1

I like the idea of source requests being permissible, both for primary as well as secondary sources. No complications arise from primary source requests as I see it as these can be evaluated objectively from the point of view of whether they cover the subject matter. With regards to secondary sources, the main complicating factor is the difficulty that we ...


1

Yes! We want quality. Answers need quality, and without sources there is probably not much quality. After all, Do we expect answers to cite sources? Is answered with at least a "tendency" towards yes, and as T.E.D. noted in an answer there: So just on the superficial objective level, I can tell you that good answers here tend to have linked references ...


1

Well, I'm going to have to spoil the party, and say we shouldn't do this. Why? Because a lot of our questions are about history within living memory. Off the top of my head, we had a question a while back about whether there were bike locks in the Soviet Union. Although some members don't see eye-to-eye with them politically, we're very lucky to have users ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible