Talk:Panteleimon Belochub

Archival research and WP:OR
You pulled most of the maybe-OR from Panteleimon Belochub when you removed the unsourced and unreliable-source stuff, but the "early life" and "WWI" sections are still mostly attributed to archival sources. I thought that was a no-go on Wikipedia? Or is this example fine because it's simple factual things like birth and death dates? (Though I suppose in this particular case there is an additional WP:V complication, since the State Archives of Donetsk Region may be some of the most inaccessible papers on earth right now...) -- asilvering (talk) 06:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , good points—I've revised. re: archival sources in general, I believe they're treated like any Primary source—to be used under limited circumstances (for unoriginal/basic claims) as long as the source is generally accessible. czar  16:42, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Czar Thanks! Good news for some of those communarde articles (once I dig my way back out from under a looming off-wiki deadline...) -- asilvering (talk) 01:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Reflecting on what I said re: general accessibility, the problem is that "State Archives of Donetsk Region" becomes very difficult to verify if not virtually unverifiable. But perhaps that is on par with verifying a citation from a rare Russian book. These claims might rest here for many years, right or wrong, just because the means of verification are difficult. czar 12:20, 7 March 2022 (UTC)