Talk:Sharon Statement

Removal of Lee Edwards
Lee Edwards is a highly respected historian and his credentials are impeccable. His article, sourced to The Daily Signal, must be restored.

Lee Edwards is a eminent historian and expert on the US conservative movement. He has published 25 books and his work has been on the NY Times bestseller list. His work is a valuable addition to any article.

The Daily Signal is published by the Heritage Foundation, which is one of if not the most notable right leaning think tanks in the United States. Their reporting is considered reliable enough to be quoted by major news organizations including Fox News, CBS, Slate, and Daily News.

Some consider Daily Signal a biased source. The Reliable Sources policy explicitly states that "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective" and acknowledges that sometimes biased sources are superior to neutral sources. Obviously, this is one of those instances.

Therefore, because of the high quality of the source, and since policy supports this source, it must be restored. – Lionel(talk) 07:50, 13 April 2018 (UTC)


 * There are multiple problems here. First off, the Heritage Foundation... sure it's a prominent conservative think-tank, but it doesn't exactly have a sterling reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. All of the citing sources you list are about one specific story that made the news. Second, Lee Edwards isn't exactly an independent voice. The guy was one of YAF's founding members. So if he said something noteworthy about the Sharon Statement I'd support inclusion with in-text attribution, but that's not how this source was being used. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 08:03, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * So your position is the source is reliable, as long as there is attribution? Because your editsum says "not a reliable source."– Lionel(talk) 08:31, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No, my position is that the source is unreliable. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 08:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You wrote "I'd support inclusion with in-text attribution." Is this the policy on which you base your support:


 * – Lionel(talk) 09:10, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No. I suppose I envisioned the relevant policy would be WP:ABOUTSELF, but it's just a hypothetical, because like I said, we're not using the source in that way. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 10:41, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * So there is no policy-based reason to use attribution with Lee Edwards, correct?– Lionel(talk) 11:03, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. And it seems you're implying my position is that we can use the source with in-text attribution, which is not what I said. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 11:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * So, just to be clear, you are still objecting to this ? – Lionel(talk) 14:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No, I stand by that edit. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 07:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Inviting recent contributors to weigh in on Removal of Lee Edwards. – Lionel(talk) 22:57, 13 April 2018 (UTC)