Talk:IBM Personal Computer XT/Archives/2021

Incorrectly placed Original research complaint date=July 2020
All but the very first paragraph of this article has cites. Calling any of it original research is, at best, mistaken, more likely vandalism and malicious abuse of Wikipedia's system. Incriminating evidence #1: There is nothing here noting what is considered by the vandal to be original research. If s/he did not know this is a very necessary part of claiming "original research", s/he should not be editing articles. Yes, I am remaining fairly anonymous because I have yet to have a positive interaction in these matters, and too often it is not resolved by the "moderators" or senior editors, or whatever their calling themselves. They certainly aren't pro-active, otherwise they'd be editting out the text marked "citation needed" which isn't done much. It's not unusual to see "cite needed" going back to the early 2000s here, because people feel no obligation to follow through. They're willing to pounce on a word or two over the "copyright material", though, which pretty much sums up their function here.