This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lebanon-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hospitals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hospitals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HospitalsWikipedia:WikiProject HospitalsTemplate:WikiProject HospitalsHospital articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Latest comment: 26 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
There has been repeated instances of blanking of the list. The removal of content without giving others the opportunity to verify and add sources seems excessive, especially given that the material is easily verifiable with a simple online search. I would like to remind contributors that blanking content should be a last resort, and encouraging the addition of reliable sources would be a more constructive approach. The tag that’s already in place is sufficient to warn readers, and blanking should only occur for content that is unverifiable or clearly problematic. el.ziade (talkallam) 09:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
You have been pointed to wp:burden. You have ignored it. If you continue to do so, I will ask for enforcement. You are free to add RS inline references. You have failed to. The burden is on you - and you have flouted it. The tag that you refer to has been in place for a number of years -- and still no inline RS refs have been provided. Everything that is not cited to an RS inline ref and that is challenged is properly subject to deletion. You're IDONTLIKEIT approach does not mean that you are properly able to ignore wp:burden - which is quite clear. Yet, you have done this repeatedly. Please stop. And self revert. --2603:7000:2101:AA00:6502:1256:C02A:C8DF (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
