This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malta, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malta 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.MaltaWikipedia:WikiProject MaltaTemplate:WikiProject MaltaMalta
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses 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.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus
Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi @Xwejnusgozo, I'm just leaving this message to explain why I added the {{self-published}} template to this page. The article currently has two sources, and one of them is a self-published source on Lulu.com, and per WP:SPS, you should [e]xercise caution when using such sources: if the information in question is suitable for inclusion, someone else will probably have published it in independent reliable sources. Furthermore, the other source is a PhD thesis, and per WP:SCHOLARSHIP, [c]ompleted dissertations or theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate, and which are publicly available ... can be used but care should be exercised, as they are often, in part, primary sources. ... If possible, use theses that have been cited in the literature; supervised by recognized specialists in the field; or reviewed by independent parties. According to Google Scholar, it doesn't appear to have been cited elsewhere, but I don't know who supervised the thesis, or whether it's been "reviewed" or not. Therefore, seeing as both sources don't appear to be of the highest quality, I added that tag. If you can add in other, better sources, that would be great! Seagull123 Φ 16:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Seagull123: I agree that a self-published book and a thesis are not the best sources for a Wikipedia article, but unfortunately they were the best ones I could find online regarding this plague outbreak, which does not seem to be that well-known (and it therefore lacks decent coverage unlike major episodes of plague such as the 1675–1676 Malta plague epidemic). I think the sources given are decent enough in this case and they do not seem to include any information which might be controversial, but if you think the article still needs the "self-published" tag feel free to re-add it (I won't revert again).
My point was that the main source's author Charles Savona Ventura is an established expert in medicine and history (as indicated by his University of Malta bio). A previous edition of the cited book had actually been published in Malta by Publishers Enterprises Group (PEG) in 2004 (see here). PEG was liquidated in 2009, which might be why the 2015 edition was self-published on Lulu.com. --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 00:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
