I would appreciate a reference to Wikipedia guidelines Regarding the admissibility of the source I would agree with you if we were looking for a commentary on Dawkins scientific work However the criticism pertains to Dawkins non scientific writings which are all essentially op ed Also unless the specific criticism that I presented is listed in the article and I didn t see that it was it warrants inclusion I ll do so in line Having said all of that I do take your point about edit warring Thanks I wasn t fully aware of the full extent of the stupidity of the situation