you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Alduin 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Yeah I agree with the removal. Wikispooks is not a reliable source. It's just another wiki with more laxed requirements on sources for that.

Get the sources you used for wikispooks and see if that works. I suspect it won't, because if it did, you would do that in the first place. Obscuring your lack of evidence behind another layer of nonsense Wikipedia knockoffs does not make it more reliable.

[–]IdleHands 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not a fan of the Wikipedia edit royalty but it seems this is a reasonable edit.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's only reasonable if you're on board with censoring real information and keeping the public in the dark about far too much that should concern them.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

FYI "mainstream" corporate media is verifiably more unreliable than WikiSpooks.