User talk:2601:300:4180:1AC0:89E1:3926:411:FA83

Charles "Buddy" Rogers
Experts do not have to give sources. Wikipedia's citation standards require that claims be to published, unbiased, reputable sources. All three citations (Rich, Wayne, and Dick) meet that standard. You and I cannot second-guess these sources. You and I cannot complain about whether these sources cite existing published, unbiased, reputable sources or not. All three books were published by reputable publishing companies and edited by reputable editors.

By adding your own assertion that Rich must cite her sources, and by removing the other two citations, you are using your own judgment in places of the published source. That is {{WP:ORIGINAL|original research]] and barred under Wikipedia's standars. - Tim1965 (talk) 01:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Charles Buddy Rogers
You really need to stop reverting cited text there. You are not the arbiter of what is a "fringe source". Wikipedia has good guidelines as to what constitutes a reliable source, and all the sources mentioned meet that standard. Moreover, multiple sources repeat the same information. Please stop substituting your own judgment for the consensus reached by Wikipedia as a whole. - Tim1965 (talk) 15:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Gene Raymond
You really need to stop reverting cited text here, too. You seem to have a particular point of view regarding Gene Raymond and Charles "Buddy" Rogers, and your user contributions seem limited to these two articles. That may constitute tendentious editing and point of view pushing. You are not the arbiter of what is a "fringe source"; I am not the arbiter. Wikipedia has good guidelines as to what constitutes a reliable source, and all the sources mentioned meet that standard. Moreover, multiple sources repeat the same information. Please stop substituting your own judgment for the consensus reached by Wikipedia as a whole. - Tim1965 (talk) 15:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC)