Talk:The Plot to Hack America/Archive 1

Background

Please leave the Background section.

It is appropriate to have info on the author, in the article about the book.

Grounds the reader in why the author has expertise on the subject matter.

Thank you ! Sagecandor (talk) 15:52, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Nevermind, I removed the Background section. I merged relevant bits, specifically about Russia and the Soviet Union, elsewhere. Sagecandor (talk) 16:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump series

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Is this article related to the topic of Donald Trump ?

Should this article include the template {{Donald Trump series}} ?

I think it is directly related to the topic, and should include the template. Sagecandor (talk) 02:54, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

RfC about the Donald Trump series {{rfc}} Should the article contain the template {{Donald Trump series}} ? Sagecandor (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Survey

• Support inclusion of the template, which is directly relevant to the subject of the article. Sagecandor (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

• No, it is a single ebook about the Russian attack against Hillary written before the election results. Why include Trump when there is nothing in the book that Trump hacked anything. It's certainly not notable enough to be in any templates and isn't a significant work on Donald Trump. It's not significant enough to be include Hillary's or Putin's template either and they are main protagonist/antagonist. Putin's disliked Hillary for a long time and Russians didn't seem to care about the Republican primary. --DHeyward (talk) 05:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose inclusion of the template and/or identifying the article as "part of a series" on Donald Trump. This book does not appear to have had a significant impact on Trump, the election or his predisency, instead it documents an event which did/may have/I don't know, and it's one of probably hundreds or thousands of works that have been/will be written about it. If we were to include every book written about presidents in series like this, these templates would be thousands of lines long. (summoned by bot) Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:09, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

This is a proposal to include the template here on this page, NOT to include this page on the template. Sagecandor (talk) 15:53, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, neutral, then. Including the template implies that the article is part of the series, and that implies that the article should also be linked in the template; eventually someone will add it in good faith. I find the template itself too long already, which isn't an issue with this article unless the template is longer than the article, but I do think it makes articles like this one unnecessarily busy. I suppose I dislike the "part of a series" templates in general, their function is better (aesthetically) accomplished by bottom-of-the-page navboxes. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ivanvector:Thank you! Sagecandor (talk) 14:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

• No the book is not focused on trump, and the template is fairly clear that it is for him and his businesses, family, his media productions, presidency, and executive actions. The book on pre-election, not his media, family, businesses,... not a match. Markbassett (talk) 03:56, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Threaded discussion

• Much of the template contains additional articles that would be of interest to the reader. Sagecandor (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Full info to the cites

Regarding [1] and [2], GA Reviewers have asked me to add the full info to the cites for other GA Reviews.

I'd rather keep as much cite info as possible to make it easier for WP:Verifiability for future editors and readers. Sagecandor (talk) 21:13, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I'd really rather have this [3] undone, please. This makes it seem like the e-books were only Amazon books, but they were generic e-books. The Amazon links are just extra info, not the whole thing. Sagecandor (talk) 21:35, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Question: Is it alright to give the full citation info for the book's publications, instead of simply links to Amazon.com ? Sagecandor (talk) 21:35, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

V-ability is satisfied when the readers/editors click on the template links. Not repeating the info makes for a cleaner section of references. – S. Rich (talk) 21:38, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The template links may break and become dead links. Full citations to books will not. Sagecandor (talk) 21:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The book is already cited both in the infobox and text. While url links break, WorldCat and ISBN links are stable. Also, note that oclc and asin links can be added to {{cite book}} – S. Rich (talk) 21:50, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Disagree as this was specifically requested in a different GA Review. I'll just defer to the GA Reviewer later, thanks. Sagecandor (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject and GA eval

As I have modified the content of the article, I am reluctant to undertake a GAR on it. However, if I were to do so at this stage I would do an immediate fail. Rationale: article is unstable and not that well written. In fact, the B class rating is unwarranted at this time. – S. Rich (talk) 04:06, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

User appears to display transparent agenda, lamenting efforts to improve articles on Wikipedia that might have some criticism of Donald Trump. See case studies: [4] [5] [6]. Sagecandor (talk) 14:48, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Categories and templates are directly relevant

Disagree with this removal of categories and templates with edit summary of: "Written before Trump election".

Are we to remove similar categories from all pages at Bibliography of Donald Trump ?

Sagecandor (talk) 18:44, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Removed, again, by IP user at No, it's not. IP user gives no explanation on talk page why it's not directly relevant. Sagecandor (talk) 18:45, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

And again with, uh no. Sagecandor (talk) 18:48, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

User was blocked by admin Widr for disruptive editing [7]. Sagecandor (talk) 01:07, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:84

Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:C0

Admins: Please compare the two. Thank you ! Sagecandor (talk) 01:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

IP user was rangeblocked: [8] [9]. Sagecandor (talk) 14:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Addition of Trump categoris unwarranted

The cats were just added. This book is about Russia, Wikileaks and Putin's dislike for Clinton. It was written before the election and it's not about Trump. --2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:84 (talk) 18:53, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

There's an entire chapter on Trump. Trump is also on the cover of the book ! Sagecandor (talk) 18:55, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

User was blocked by admin Widr for disruptive editing [10]. Sagecandor (talk) 19:07, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

IP user was rangeblocked: [11] [12]. Sagecandor (talk) 14:54, 17 June 2017 (UTC)