A closer reading suggests that this might also be an issue of WP V perhaps moreso than WP PSTS This particular article makes quite a number of claims some referenced some not It is also written with a clearly opinionated slant this itself would not be a disqualification necessarily but it does raise the bar for its inclusion as evidence somewhat given that it is making a clear attempt to push a POV and we should not allow that POV to creep into our article the fact that I was not able to determine either whether it was published in the newspaper or blog or if the former in which section further confounds our ability to identify it as a either reliable or as a primary or secondary source Where that leaves us is here it is in part a primary source or opinion piece which would argue against its inclusion and it may also be an insufficiently referenced secondary source which would also argue against its inclusion I think that the other sources are adequate it pushes a POV hard enough that i think including it would suggest additional problems with WP NPOV compliance the issues with this article s verifiability are serious enough to me to merit its exclusion I will probably be able to post something at WP RSN later this evening