":From WP:COMPETENCE...
Where we very often see big controversies, though, is with editors who are disruptive while trying to help. This is where we sometimes see a harmful side effect of our (generally quite useful) notion of assuming good faith. Many editors have focused so much on this that they have come to believe that good faith is all that is required to be a useful contributor. Sadly, this is not the case at all. Competence is required as well. 
Competence is required.  Yet, what can we do when we suspect that competence is lacking?  That entry does not provide any step by step process for allowing us to express our concerns regarding editors who are editing outside their areas of expertise.  So Wikipedia policy clearly states that competence is required...but it doesn't give us anything to do about it.  

When we suspect that an entry has a problem...what do we do about it?  Well...either we fix it or we tag the page so that other people can hopefully fix the problem.  Clearly I believe these two editors have a problem...but what could I do to fix it?  Obviously I spent a lot of time trying to encourage them to look at the reliable sources.  That didn't work...so all I could think to do was ""tag"" them with an accurate label so that other editors might be alerted to the problem.  

Are there better ways of dealing with problems of incompetence?  There are always better ways to deal with problems.  But so far no other editors have brought any other ways to my attention.  Just because I've ""tagged"" these two editors as having a problem...in no way, shape or form means that any other editors will do anything about it.  But that's on them.           

"