Talk:Woodside Store

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Woodside Store article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Museums

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

California: San Francisco Bay Area

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force.

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Using supportparks.org as a source[edit]

Joojay had problems with the use of this page on supportparks.org as a source, because it's supposedly a primary source. It sounds like in this case, it's less the being primary vs secondary that's at issue (I believe it's a secondary source for this particular information - it's not a direct account from someone who was at the opening etc) but rather the independence of the source (the copyright to the page is held by the county, that also owns the property). Given the information it's supporting (the entry into the California Register for historic landmarks and the year that the store opened as a museum, I didn't imagine this would be so controversial. This would probably be different when I'd use it to support claims about its national importance etc. For now, I undid the revert, assuming there is some misunderstanding, that we can resolve here on the talk page. effeietsanders 16:30, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Effeietsanders: the issue is that this is common information that can be found in second RS sources, unsure why you would prefer using a primary source? Joojay (talk) 16:50, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joojay: The thing is, for these facts this is not a primary source. The primary source here would be a statement by the civil servant that made the registry, or the registry itself. This page describes the fact that it is registered, and provides an expert interpretation of it. There are several primary sources in the article though, and that is fine depending on the facts that they are used for (Policy: A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge). Most of the information in the article is of this straightforward descriptive nature to begin with. Hopefully you can take some time to closely review this again, and let me know if you arrive at the same conclusion. If there are specific concerns you have with this source in combination with the facts it supports, I'm all ears. effeietsanders 18:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source is published by the owners of the property and museum, which is the County of San Mateo (just as you stated before). The argument is dragging on here to justify using it for one fact about when the County of San Mateo opened the museum. The San Mateo County Parks Foundation is the same county offices as the San Mateo County Parks Department. I don't think this is "controversial", but rather bad editing practice since other sources do exist. Joojay (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, so it's not really the primary/secondary nature, but rather the independence of the source that bothers you. I can appreciate that. Feel free to add a different source for that section, of course. I just didn't understand why you reverted the entire edit. effeietsanders 19:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]