Talk:Canon EOS R3

Canon EOS R3 moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Canon EOS R3, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Currently, there is a single, primary source. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:20, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

"Currently, there is a single, primary source" - Yes, there is only one reference ... It's the page of the manufacturer (Canon Inc.). Who else would be a better, more reliable and trustworthy source than the manufacturer of the camera itself? I could add a couple of references to pages that have a bunch of speculations and rumours on them (which some of them already turned out to be false). The last time I checked theorising was not welcome on Wikipedia. Did that change in the past at some point?

"Information that can't be referenced should be removed" - I only added information that was provided by the main source (again: data provided by the manufacturer). If you read the source, you would know!

Considering the poor and very few reasoning, I question the move as neither being well thought out nor necessary. Therefore I the article should be moved back or at least one comprehensible argument should be added

--D-Kuru (talk) 15:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)