Talk:Collapse of Eddie Murphy
a lot of information here isn't cited or is straight up lies as following from testimonies from firsthand witnesses and people directly involved. please do not remove the neutrality warning until these conditions are met.
I would agree that the page needs to be reviewed and backed up with more references. A review by a third party would be helpful. I will try to rewrite this article to be more impartial than what it currently is --- no offense to all of the parties affected. Kaprediem (talk) 04:14, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Citations are either unrelated or quite literally borderline incriminate the opposite person. Please have a 3rd party look over Citations that is uninvolved with the conflict before submitting them Yodabird. (P.S. It feels as if some citations are quite literally being added to make the article seem more legitimate. Citations such as server mechanics that should be common knowledge don't need to be included and just make the article more hard to read.) - Kaloa_HG 14:08, 29 October 2021 (PST)
The contested 1568-byte edit destroys information for no reason. Yes, citations are added to "make the article seem more legitimate" - why else would citations be added? If the citations "incriminate the opposite person", that is not their or my fault. Looking over the six citations that you tried to delete, each one absolutely supports the point that it's affixed to (including the barrel one); certainly, some are indirect or imperfect (such as the barrel one), but I'm not going to paste an entire Discord conversation's worth of context into a citation just to meet some "criteria". There are no valid "criteria before reverting this change", so they're vacuously met. Edit reverted again, please don't continue on this point. - yodabird19 13:09, 1 November 2021 (EST)
The statement provided makes no logical sense. Correct the sentences the citations are applied to that way the match the applied material. Currently these citations are applied to sentences that they have either no relation to, or the sentence does not properly represent said citation. Please follow up on having a 3rd party look over said citations before they are re-applied. Thank you for your compliance. - Kaloa_HG 11:31, 1 November 2021 (PST)