I thought blackmail and things like that are what M15 [sic] and other intel agencies were supposed to do for info and other things. It's fucked up of course but no surprise.

Don't bring it up if you don't care.

I'm sorry, what?

Wikipedia isn't good enough for you but the Independent is?

Yes, it is. Wikipedia is not a source, otherwise Wikipedia could cite Wikipedia and you'd have a circular reference. Do you understand this? Because I do. I understand Wikipedia through and through.

Wikipedia is sometimes criticized for being used as a source of circular reporting.[4] Wikipedia advises all researchers and journalists to be wary of using Wikipedia as a direct source, and instead focus on verifiable information found in an article's cited references.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reporting

Any beginning researcher knows this, and such knows why it is acceptable to cite the Independent (whether its ideological background is to your taste or not) and not a Wikipedia article when you're doing satisfying explicit source requests. Don't lecture me on "reasonable", thank you.

People have known about this shit for years, stop getting mad because you didn't.

You had the onus probandi. Vague catchall "starter kits" don't qualify where specific claim-validating sources do. It's irritatingly lazy for someone to make a highly specific claim and then brush it off with generic Wikipedia articles. You're not going to bother to satisfy the claims appropriately? In your position I would have found a source meeting the standards set in WP:Verify, make sure the date predates my link, quote the relevant section, past it in a reply followed by the source link. Job done, it's not that hard if you spoke the truth and specific sources in mind when you said it. I'm going to chalk this up as a fail on your part, until you do what is decent. Reversal of the onus or providing generic sources certainly isn't.

/r/ShitAmericansSay Thread Parent Link - np.reddit.com