Talk:Warlocks Motorcycle Club (Pennsylvania)

Untitled

"They bear "colors" that are unique to the other Warlocks organizations" That doesn't make sense. Who are the colors unique to? are they unique if others have them? Talltim (talk) 12:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Many errors as to current and past information on this page

The Warlocks MC Phila changed its patch in a vote in August 2019 . By vote the club reverted back to its original patch which was the Black Dragon with upper rocker Warlocks in a special font and bottom rocker Phila. The Http://WarlocksMCnation.com . The Warlocks MC 1%er has never claimed territory and still doesn’t . As for conflicts of interests. There isn’t any as editors aren’t necessarily patched members of this club and do not have first hand knowledge. Warlock Wrath (talk) 20:33, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Warlock Wrath, thank you very much for starting a discussion here.

Wikipedia is a tertiary source: It summarizes what secondary sources (e.g. newspapers) say, mostly. It does contain some information from primary sources (e.g. official websites) and tertiary sources (e.g. other encyclopedias), but it mainly relies on what secondary reliable sources say. A more detailed explanation of this situation can be found at WP:PSTS, part of the "no original research" policy.

The "no original research" policy was created to prevent exactly this kind of disputes. First-hand knowledge can be a useful starting point for research, but Wikipedia articles must not rely solely on such knowledge. Imagine one of the clubs' enemies came here claiming to be a member, and providing false information. Wikipedia's readers need a way to verify Wikipedia's content. The verifiability policy explains this issue in detail.

As a compromise, perhaps we could agree to the following approach: Let's remove all statements from the article that are currently disputed. If two sources say different things, let's not write anything about it on Wikipedia for now. If we can't be sure that the information is correct, let's remove it for now. For example, if a year number is disputed, let's remove it. It can later be restored if the situation becomes more clear.

Vif12vf/Tiberius and Warlock Wrath, would this be okay for you as a first step of this discussion? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:17, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

While I appreciate that second hand contributors, they do not necessarily have the correct information. As for including things and such as newspaper articles or pictures from magazines or articles how does one edit to place these pics from magazines with dates onto the wiki page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warlock Wrath (talk • contribs) 21:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

A more usual case is newer information appearing on the official website first. It then takes a while for such information to appear in other sources, so we do sometimes prefer newer first-hand information to outdated second-hand information.

Here, however, we seem to be talking about historical details. If newspapers got these wrong, it may be extremely hard to solve this problem. I'd say that the best way to correct such errors is to contact the newspapers Wikipedia relies on. This might be impossible for old archived copies of printed newspapers.

I sadly can't provide a perfect solution here. Since usually, secondary reliable sources are good sources of information, it may be very hard or even impossible to correct a Wikipedia article based on them, if no other better secondary sources exist. This is a fundamental problem of Wikipedia, but also its largest strength in most cases. Insisting on this principle is, while it may seem strange or even completely incorrect, what has allowed Wikipedia to grow and stay reliable for so long.

Let's see what Vif12vf/Tiberius has to say about this. Perhaps he has an idea. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, one additional note: I think I have misunderstood your question. Warlock Wrath, if you do have magazines / newspapers that support your changes, we can cite them. They don't have to be available online; it is fine to cite offline sources. We'll need the name of the magazine, its publication date, the page the information appeared on and perhaps a short quote. If you click "Cite" at the top of the editor window, and then "Templates --> cite journal", a form will open for providing such information. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you... while I agree that some information is correct , being a patched member of this club and having access to the bylaws and amended bylaws of the club, the following information is the correct historical data concerning the Warlocks MC 1%er .

The Warlocks MC 1%er was founded in 1964 but originally existed as a before 1964 as a community club known as the Warlords.

The original center patch was a black dragon as shown in The Sunday Bulletin Magazine on October 22, 1967. There is a cited source that is secondary.

The Warlocks MC then moved to the Harpy center patch in 1968. As stated before, the Warlocks MC 1%er Phila voted to change it’s back patch back to the original 1964 patch. This patch was trademarked by the club and is on view at USPTO ( United States Patent & Trademark Office) and number was referenced in one of the edits made.

These changes are not arguable or arbitrary. I have now given an example of a secondary source (magazine) and USPTO trademark registration number, as well as the MC’s website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warlock Wrath (talk • contribs) 22:07, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Memberships, any openings for 1

Myself 74.37.6.68 (talk) 01:57, 30 October 2024 (UTC)