Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 315:

:I'm following Wikipedia's guidelines on proper sourcing. Recaps are not considered reliable sources when it comes to talking about a controversy with the public, which I have informed you multiple times. I asked you to provide the "media coverage" you speak of and still haven't done so. I added an actual reliable source, ''[[The Washington Post]]''. [[User:Miss HollyJ|Miss HollyJ]] ([[User talk:Miss HollyJ|talk]]) 15:59, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

::@Miss HollyJ, even if you disapprove of the sources that [[User:TheDoctorWho]] wants to use, this is not a big enough concern to allow you to revert without penalty per [[WP:3RRNO]]. Normally, agreement on quality of sources is reached through discussion among editors. There may still be time for you to back away from the situation. Otherwise, you could be blocked for [[WP:3RR]] violation. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 18:31, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

:::My edits were reverted 4 times by that user as well. I let them know that they can't use recaps as a source because all that they include are summaries of the episode which are already listed in the article under the episodes section. I read it and there is no mention whatsoever of controversy or criticism. I don't think that warrants a discussion on an opinion amongst editors when the facts show there is no proof in that source to back up their claims. I asked for the "press coverage" they talked about and still haven't been able to provide it. [[User:Miss HollyJ|Miss HollyJ]] ([[User talk:Miss HollyJ|talk]]) 19:18, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

== [[User:24.172.13.66]] reported by [[User:Billhpike]] (Result: ) ==