Talk:2015 Arizona Bowl

Sideline reporter
While I don't necessarily doubt that Monica McNutt is the sideline reporter, that information is not in the source quoted (see for context). That's because I added the source for Thulin and Chapman, and that source does not mention sideline reporters. I don't think it's unreasonable to insist that information added to the article be sourced. Mackensen (talk) 23:46, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have sourced this information to a press release, which also names Shae Peppler as a sideline reporter in addition to McNutt. Mackensen (talk) 00:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Shae Peppler is hosting the pre-game show, halftime show, and the post-game, not acting as a sideline reporter. This was announced today by Campus Insiders and the MW Conference here. Meanwhile it was the Arizona Bowl themselves that announced McNutt would be the sideline reporter for the Arizona Bowl on their Twitter account. This was announced Sunday here. Given that it is the BOWL themselves that announced it, then it is happening. You wouldn't be able to find a previous source with the information because it is a late addition. They also announced on their Twitter page the Halftime Show. And it should be noted that the source originally mentioned from 506sports has added her as a sideline reporter for the game. EVERY bowl game includes the sideline reporter in their listings. This one shouldn't be excluded just because one person chooses to rely on an old reference that is more than a week older than updated information that has been shared. Bigddan11 (talk) 02:37, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what the issue is here. If anyone was "relying" on the old reference, it's you: you added McNutt but didn't update the reference, which left this article in the awkward position of claiming that the 506Sports reference, which you (rightly) call outdated, contained the information that McNutt was the reporter (which it does not). Verifiability is a bedrock principle; the article could hardly be left in that state. I noted, accurately, that the source didn't support the claim and reverted you. I think the obvious step for you to take at that point would be to update the reference in the article to one which contained the relevant information. As it happens I did that several hours ago, so there's no question of information being excluded. In fact, I went one better and added Peppler, after finding the ASN press release. Mackensen (talk) 04:13, 24 December 2015 (UTC)