::The reasons your sources are not RS has nothing to do with point of view.  They are self-published works.  Material cited from a non-RS source, such as another web site or a self-published work, carries no more weight than material which has no citation at all. If you permit the former, you should permit the latter.  This case is unique in that the church publishes nothing and there is very little RS material. If you like we can take the sections I restored, place them on a legitimate web site, and then cite that web site.  Would that satisfy you?  I won't bother responding to your assessment of my previous position.  I think we agree that POV and accuracy issues are more important than sourcing in this case. However, controversial statements should always be sourced from a RS.