[1][2]. Is this true? That a large chunk of one of our FA's is based on opinion? I don't know much about the older Castle themes, so I can't really comment, but I think this backstory should be sourced somehow. I've tagged the page with a WIP template and commented out the current backstory section until this is resolved, because if what the latest editor said is true and there is no background information, this backstory section really shouldn't exist. Is anyone able to find some sources please? I still won't be active enough to take a good look at this for some time, but I do think it's really important that it's resolved fairly quickly as the issue is on an FA after all NightblazeSaber 03:26, October 1, 2011 (UTC)
Personally, I think we should keep them. - nxt 07:04, October 1, 2011 (UTC)
Well, a lot of this page is wrong/out of date/incomplete/non MOS compliant anyway (although I tried to fix a lot of that about a month ago), so I wouldn't be surprised if this is true. -CligraJoin the redlink war!
No, our FA is copied from Wikipedia. [3]. Just like our Space Page and our Town Page. At least, they originally were. BF2 Talk 21:12, October 2, 2011 (UTC)
Can anyone else say "Sources" ? -NBP 21:18, October 2, 2011 (UTC)
Doesn't really matter, if Wikipedia has it an it's sourced, then we're fine. Of course, it's unoriginal, but that's not the point. BF2 Talk
It's not sourced. NightblazeSaber 10:57, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
I see three solutions: (A) We Remove It (B) We Leave It (C) We Ask Lair of Rockwhales What He Knows, and get ridiculed for not being experts Nevermind, he only deals with the ninties, but we'd still get ridiculed for not knowing. Anyway, I'm going to go with (A) --Berrybrick (Talk) 11:02, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
I agree. I've removed the section entirely for now- if we get any reliable information, it can always be added back in NightblazeSaber 11:16, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
