Talk:Essex 73's

reintroduction of unverified claims
I made seven different edits to this article, only to see them all unilaterally reverted by with the incomplete and unspecific edit summary of "RV section blanking". Given the facts as already laid out in this discussion, I cannot understand this reversion, but will explain its provenance nonetheless before reimplementation.With regards to the removal of unverified prose, the verifiability policy unequivocally says that "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source." Furthermore, with regards to adding unverified claims, that same policy says, "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." In context, the policy says we may remove unverified claims, and I did so; the policy also says we may not replace those claims without citing them, which DMighton has done nonetheless.As they gave no explanation, I further cannot understand why DMighton also replaced empty infobox parameters, contravened the Manual of Style on text formatting, removed official website, replaced unpiped redirections, and unalphabetized the categories. Does anybody else have input on how and why this article is exempt from the verifiability provisions noted above? —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 19:27, 30 November 2020 (UTC)