So were back at the point we were before  is there something special about the relationship between Hagos and Biasutti that allows this transfer of expertise just by citation My point is that it takes years of training experience and recognition by others in the field to be considered an expert in that field You seem to be saying Hagos got it just by citing Biasutti If David Attenborough cited Niels Bohr would he become an expert in Physics No he wouldnt hed just be an expert in biology who happened to cite an expert in physics once  we wouldnt be able to accept anything he said about quantum mechanics or block holes as fact until we checked it with a genuine expert in the field So what makes you think Hagos has become an expert in human skin colour just by citing Biasutti And remember that the policy doesnt just state expert  it states established expert in the topic whose previous work in the field has been published by reliable thirdparty publications  unless you are you going to argue that Hagos got Biasuttis reputation and previous publications as well I think this is a dead end argument You should accept that Hagos doesnt meet the criteria laid down by the WP policy for the creators of selfpublished sources If you dont think that Hagos chose the colours for each country then who do you think did it They didnt just magically change due to migration trends  somebody made a decision that colour X goes in country Y From the evidence we have it would appear that Hagos was the one who made that decision  it certainly wasnt made by Biasutti or the writers of the national census data that he cites as his sources It makes no difference to the situation so I wont argue it but for the record I dont accept that Hagos is a recognised expert on migration