Mark Williamson wrote:
Whenever somebody adds a random cite to an article written mostly or entirely by me, I remove it unless I actually DID use that source.
So no one is allowed to touch the article references section except yourself? That's a little possessive, to say the least. Suppose I check your claims against my reference, find them good, see no reason to change the text, and add the reference as a token that I've done the checking?
References are there for *other* people to use; if you've neglected to mention the standard text that readers should look at if they want to know more, then other editors need to be able to fix your mistake.
By your reasoning, we could never add to the references section for an article written two years ago by someone who has since moved on, nor could a 1911EB-derived article ever get updated references, at least not without casting a resurrection spell first...
Stan