User talk:75.76.7.92

November 2019
Hello, I'm TheAwesomeHwyh. I noticed that you recently removed content from Citgo without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The BBC is reliable. TheAwesome  Hwyh  04:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I explained why. BBC is not a reliable source. "IF" a contribution was made to this or any other politician there will be reliable sources. I have looked for them and this contribution does not exist. Failure to not allow this section from being removed is a constitutes political favoritism. Last I looked Wikipedia does not allow media reports as "reliable" sources. Falling from this threatens tax exempt status.


 * I believe it's always good to have folks on-guard for issues such as source-reliability and political favouratism. Conversely, it is equally good to have those that question the questioners. In a couple minutes of searching, I located the sourcing that you were saying would sate your concern; https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/286/201704180300150286/201704180300150286.pdf. While it is a 508 page report, fortunately Citgo's donation is officially documented on page 21, section B.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BoringJim (talk • contribs) 06:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)