Changes

::::Tut tut tut, I am sure you wanted to say that you have all 1st edition books in paper, as publicly stating that you possess illegal scans of copyrighted

material would be not wise ;) As to your example of the ''Steel Confessors'': If there was a leaflet published on GW Games Day that is an official source. If the article therefore has been properly sourced by a reliable Lexicanum editor that is fine. If the article has ''not'' been sourced properly or there is reasonable reason to doubt the editor in question the info has to be removed. The Angelfire website can be discarded as reliable info, it is not official and therefore to be treated as fanfluff. And is therefore not an accepted source. Very clear case: remove all that is not from an official source and if need be the whole article has to be deleted. In the case of Tezla the case is even clearer: Specialist Games is (was) 100% GW company. Therefore everything published there is an official source. Plus we can check it (as for example I have copies of many/ most all SG files which are also legal and can be shared for research because they were published from the beginning as freely available files). So the two cases are very different. And as I said, one of the point of collaborative work is to be able to pool resources to check content. Therefore my suggestion of using a central page to coordinate such efforts. --[[User:Inquisitor S.|Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum]] ([[User talk:Inquisitor S.|talk]]) 12:07, 21 November 2018 (MST)