I would argue that Wikipedia while not a great primary source has pretty stringent guidelines for providing sources in it’s articles. So you’ve answered with a thought terminating cliche and refused to elaborate. In other words you’re incorrect and to fragile to admit it.
Lol, I didn’t have to read the URL to know what that link was going to be. Wikipedia continues to be The Holy Scripture to western shitlibs
You should really counter point with your own source if you’re going to tell someone their source is insufficient
This dead horse was already beaten half a day ago in this thread.
No. That’s not remotely how that works.
I would argue that Wikipedia while not a great primary source has pretty stringent guidelines for providing sources in it’s articles. So you’ve answered with a thought terminating cliche and refused to elaborate. In other words you’re incorrect and to fragile to admit it.
Removed by mod
Shitlibs when the Holy Scripture is questioned.