User talk:Erpert/Archives/2020/September

Confusing edit
How is this better? ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * That's the way a majority of the music-related articles on here have their respective descriptions written. And I don't see how that's a "confusing" edit.  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 02:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Sally Brown
Hi Erpert, I made some edits to improve the Sally Brown article that you correctly identified as lacking proper seconday sources. However, I disagree with your recent edit adding an unreliable sources tag, which you added with the summary "The comic strips themselves don't seem to be reliable sources". I think that primary sources are acceptable as verification for in-universe facts. Is the problem that they're online? I could quote the printed books if it would help. What do you think would help to improve the article further? — Toughpigs (talk) 03:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Actually, in-universe sourcing for a fictional work can be problematic; see WP:INUNIVERSE.  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 04:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I see what you mean about the in-universe phrasing, but that's not a problem of "reliable sources", which is what you've tagged the article with. How can the primary source not be reliable? — Toughpigs (talk) 05:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure GoComics counts as a primary source. And for the record, I am a HUGE Peanuts fan, but the articles shouldn't be written that way on Wikipedia.  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 23:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, if the problem is the GoComics links, I can replace those with references to the printed books. I agree that some of it is not very well-written, so I'll do what I can to fix that as well. — Toughpigs (talk) 01:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)