Well to respond to your question directly i would mention Editorial commentary  are rarely reliable for statements of fact Or the reporting of rumors has a limited encyclopedic value But be it that or be it mentioning WPBIASED was here more for the form i have never really understood the foundation of this being here My question therefore would be why are you opposing the correction of an unsourced unsigned and incorrect as per its own definition piece of information it can not even be referred to as a controversy since it is absolutely not a state of prolonged public dispute or debate so what is the reason you would find this is a correct encyclopedic information