User talk:SpectralEnforcer

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to 2009 Norwegian spiral anomaly, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. __meco (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

So you claim my change was "original work or thought" and that it cannot be accepted hm? What do you call the quote you have from Jonathan McDowell then. It is his opinion that an alleged Russian rocket malfunctioned in the way he claims it to have. Since when is a private individual's opinion any less valid than the opinion of an astrophysicist that most likely has no firm grasp of Rocket science? Oh, that's right, it's not any less valid. Just that you control the editing of the page so you say who is valid or not regardless of merit. :)

Classy.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SpectralEnforcer (talk • contribs)

I hope you don't mind me moving here what was originally posted on my user page (then an admin moved it to my user talk page).

I assumed it was original research. Editors are allowed to make such assumptions (and experienced editors will do so frequently), if they are wrong that can easily be rectified. If the text which you entered into the article can be attributed to a notable individual and has been published in a reliable third-party source then I shall have no objections to it being interjected. I'm just playing by the rules set up by Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

As for your question to me re McDowell's qualifications for making his assertion, I find your point quite reasonable and suggest you raise it on the talk page of the article. __meco (talk) 20:58, 15 December 2009 (UTC)