User talk:Raleigh-Chopper

Please stop making unconstructive edits to Raleigh Chopper, such as: Continuing to do so is considered disruptive editing. -AndrewDressel (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * removing the lead image without giving a reason,
 * causing references to display incorrectly,
 * removing references to reliable sources without giving a reason, and
 * inserting the poorly-worded and unreferenced claim that "the Raleigh Chopper's design is always a myth."


 * Please stop 'assuming' the daily mail is a reliable source, it is probably the most unreliable source known to man, have you actually met either Tom Karen or Alan Oakley? NO!


 * I have had the pleasure of speaking to them in person, and I know a lot more about raleigh choppers than you ever will. -Raleigh-Chopper (talk) 10:34, 20 November 2016‎ (UTC)


 * You are completely missing the point. If you were writing your own blog or creating your own website, you could write whatever you wanted, and everyone would be free to ignore it. Here, on Wikipedia, however, you are not free to write whatever you want. You must provide verifiable and reliable sources to support every claim. Those are simply the rules. It doesn't even matter if you are Tom Karen or Alan Oakley. You may not insert claims supported only by your personal experience, and continuing to do so after you have been warned not to is going to be quick way to get yourself banned from editing Wikipedia at all. -AndrewDressel (talk) 21:20, 19 November 2016 (UTC)


 * That's the whole point, unreliable sources - daily mail, need I say any more. All I want is for the page to be as accurate as possible, there has been many myths other the years which the media copy from the Wikipedia page anyway and then post it on their pages. -Raleigh-Chopper (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2016‎


 * The Daily Mail is not the only one. BikeBiz reports that "Dr Karen's claim is backed by the Design Council, which gave Dr Karen a special commendation in 2002 for his lifetime achievements, including the Chopper." If you have a particular problem with a source, you should bring that up on the Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Until then, there is no reason to suspect or assume that their article recounting an interview with Dr Karen is anything but legitimate. -AndrewDressel (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2016 (UTC)