This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: American Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the American television task force.

The following discussion is copied and pasted from users' talk pages. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 11:03, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ClearThinker. Thanks for your contributions to True Justice. Unfortunately I've removed it, since it seemed to be entirely your own work/opinions. True as it all may be, you need to quote reputable sources - to back you up - for that kind of content on Wikipedia. Check out the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources

Again, apologies - don't mean to step on your hard work. If you've cobbled all that info together from elsewhere, feel free to stick it back up with references. Cheers, Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 18:38, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your feedback about True Justice. I do feel that a full deletion of the section is perhaps going a little too far, but understand the importance of sourcing. I am researching different options to better source the material, but in consultation with other editors the feedback I've received is that much of the content falls under the category of common knowledge (in the case of describing Seattle & the Puget Sound area), or alternatively is referring directly to content within the in-line cited episodes. It is difficult to identify places where sourcing is useful, without using attributions that are so high-level as to be meaningless -- for example, a link to the State of Washington government website where names of cities and counties can be found.

Still, I'll take another look at this. I recognize the level of detail is incongruent with the rest of the article's contents, and can be construed as unreasonable criticism or personal attack. In fact, my purpose is to provide useful and relevant information for series enthusiasts who enjoy the show equally for its dramatic but also comedic values. The success of Mr. Seagal's projects over the last decade or so has depended both on loyal fans who take the works seriously, but also fans who view his work more light-heartedly. This content targets the latter.

I have since made changes to try to more appropriately frame the content as not being "criticism" but instead a comparison of the show's setting and the region as it exists in real life. I will make further changes to better source the material to the degree that I can.

Best regards,

Clearthinker00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clearthinker00 (talk • contribs) 19:46, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well look, I don't care enough about this so I'm not going to delete it again if you're just going to keep putting it back up, but I have tagged it as - once again - unsourced and original research. I know it's annoying, but you need to find other sources that have said exactly what you're saying, and use them to back you up. I don't believe that any Wikipedian would have told you that you don't need this, as you claim, and your contribution history kinda suggests you haven't actually spoken to anyone else at all. If you actually read the rules and ask some questions on some talk pages, you might start to get how it works... Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 11:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]