OK that s what I would have thought But I don t see how this is compatible with a literal reading of the OR policy as quoted above Its all very well to agree in friendly discussion with you that the policy is a red herring but its not pleasant to have the policy quoted in unfriendly edit wars If you want an example then consider For example I could just write John Adams was born in 1735 and leave it at that because that Wikipedia article SAYS he was born in 1735 SO IT MUST BE TRUE Wrong That is not how Wikipedia works I m afraid Wikipedia is a tertiary source How does that sound to you