Talk:Carl Henrik Langebaek

Unjustified tagging
The page, the result of my hard work and referenced with 7 independent reliable sources, has been tagged by User redsox as "needing more references". No reason has been given, no discussion started, no specifics. The Maintenance page states "3 - If it reasonably appears that the template did not belong when placed or was added in error (discussing the matter with the original placer of the template is advised, though if the user is no longer active this becomes moot; however, if the issue appears contentious, seek consensus on the talk page)" Tisquesusa (talk) 02:34, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) it is completely unfair that someone not familiar with the subject can just jump in and place an ugly tag without discussing it first and that the person who did the hard work needs to seek "consensus".
 * 2) as long as there are no specifics given, this tag is useless. "Citation needed" tags are useful and justified when it's about things that are obviously ground for it. If in an article about let's say Donald Trump is said that "he grew up in a poor family" then the Citation needed tag is justified. Here there's no specifics given whatsoever and even after a couple of reverts the placer of the tag refuses to state why and where "additional sources" would be needed. Without those specifics the tag becomes irrelevant.