User talk:89.102.1.109

Sourcing
Regarding your changes to the Albigensian Crusade, per WP:Verifiability and WP:Citing sources, all information in an article must be sourced where it is presented in that article. This means that you cannot simply direct me to look in other articles for sources; it all has to be right there. This would, in any case, have been impossible for one of the names that you added because no Wikipedia article exists for that person. Just telling me, as you did in your edit summary, that the information is true doesn't mean anything either. You need to provide sources to verify it.

Furthermore, if the names of the people and entities that you added were not found notable enough to be included in the body of the article, then I find it unlikely that they would be notable enough to include in the infobox. Display name 99 (talk) 12:09, 1 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Display name 99 This all seems reasonable, but only if the current article followed it as well, which it's not, because current information is also without sources and especially in an unusable condition, for example: where does it say in the article that England fought for Cathars? That's clear nonsence. Why does it appear that France participated under the Papal States? Why does the Papal States have the modern flag of Vatican City? None of this is explained by the article, but clear mistakes and nonsence, it's useless and lame information also without sources. My changes were without sources, so ok, but they were beneficial and more elaborate compared with this and you don't mind that current version is terrible and useless for education, unfortunately your approach will not make the article better, for quality improvement. The lack of sources is also bad, but they can be supplemented at any time, but leaving current information insufficient is more deceptive for readers, that's no improvement. 89.102.1.109 (talk) 19:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)


 * What is in the infobox is sourced not in the infobox itself necessarily but within the article. Saying that England fought with the Cathars is not "clear nonsense," and it is explained in the article. See the final paragraph of the "Toulouse" section, where it is stated that a contingent of English soldiers helped defend the town of Marmande against the Crusaders in 1214. Furthermore, England was at war with France at that time, and assuming that you were aware of this, I do not believe that you should have been so quick to call the inclusion of the Kingdom of England here nonsense. My guess for the reason behind France being listened under the Papal States was that the enterprise was called by the papacy and led by the Church, with the French monarch not directly participating until near the end. As for the Papal States flag, I was not the person who added that and it can probably be removed or replaced.


 * You added a lot of names of peoples and entities that supposedly participated in the Crusade but who are not mentioned in the body of the article. If all of them really did do so, they can be added there in appropriate places and with reliable sources. Then we can determine whether or not they are worthy of inclusion in the infobox. Display name 99 (talk) 12:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)