Talk:Prince Alexander of Kartli (died 1773)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Georgia (country)

	Georgia (country) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians 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.Georgia (country)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country) articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Iran

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Revert

I reverted this for I know Kober long and well enough to realize that he's fully aware that this article (amongst many other articles) needs more inline references, but is written conform completely verifiable material, as well as conform Wiki's start/stub-class measurements. The fact that the user in question shown on the diff specifically and only tags certain specific material from many Georgia-related articles, do not make it legitimate. Or he should immediately start tagging all the tons of content on Georgia-related pages that are without inline references, without any exception.

To sum it up; a template tag at the top for this start-class article is more than sufficient to adress the points. Which is present at the moment. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 03:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Damianmx: @LouisAragon: Guys, this article literally cannot and shouldn't be of edit war material at all. If the source tells us he was indeed a Muslim and born in Safavid Persia than we can say he was Shia by definition. Jaqeli 23:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia: the appropriate response is to provide the requested reliable source, not to threaten an editor with POINT for invoking it. FactStraight (talk) 15:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"POINT" has nothing to do here. I'm just saying; either tag everything, or tag nothing, and add a template to show your concerns, as the latter does the job just fine here. Preferably fix it even yourself (which I often do for example depending on the case). Or am I hoaxing, and is the rest here actually (invisibly) inline referenced? Are the lines after this particular statement referenced then?...

This unsourced statement makes it no different from the unsourced statements stated after it, and to say that's "WP:POINT", is, excuse me, quite ridiculous at best. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]