lion vs tiger consenses request hello keith i was wondering if you could help fix the lion vs tiger topic it seems the topic has a certain someone with abusuing wikipedias ethics and using it to pump out some type of bias supremacy cherry picking and being subjective even contradicting his own guidelines he uses makes false accusations and is hypocritical to his own suggestions i'd like to start it off with suggesting to review the revision of its current and compare it to a previous one changes were made simply because some of the data was unreliable as stated in the talk i have learned that i must only make comments on the edits and not the editors so i will try and keep it as so to better adress it my main delima is this topic has been unchecked for years and has no true consensus that is confirmed reliable and un bias so i would like to request if you could share the info with a few others to develop a basic un bias assesment i'd like to start it off with pointing out a guide line under its history the qualifications should be of historical signifcance so only people with back grounds of ph d and masters degrees should be accepted for reliability and credability via historians physical comparison the qualifications should be adressed on a species scale the historical significance is graded on its history so it must refraim from cherry picking sub speices via bengal and siberian but then leave out the malay sumatran bali ect and include all of them to reach an average accidental fights in captivity the qualifications all historical modern accounts should be fully brought to the awareness of the world public the details should be mentioned for both sides regardless if its a un fair fight of gender age and quanity odds all documentation should be accepted according to reliablility as of now there is only pro tiger data that is in effect as pure insinuation via cherry picked while other reliable sources that supports the lion is being constantly erased with no viable reasons other than false accusations and making things up expert opinions the qualifications should be upon people with observation upon seeing them fight an opinion from someone with experince working with these animals is not enough and holds no merits since the topic is specifically on fighting if they haven't seen them fight has no cites mentioning a observed fight it shoulden't be used only people who have been eye witnesses to conflicts between the two should be used for credability i am suggesting a more fair assesment since what is in place now is subjective bias and pro data both sides of the coin should be mentioned all the substance should be mentioned both ways and a fair assesment on what is avaliable to add in should be implimented both ways of its reliability and credability thank you for your time