User talk:86.140.49.221

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Original research and neutral point of view

You have added some information to the article Grandiosa that constitutes original research. The "doubt" about the ingredients in the pizza is raised by one anonymous individual on a message board. All claims of that character should be supported by multiple reliable sources. To avoid an edit war, I won't revert your addition again, but I still think that you need to re-phrase or remove the content altogether. Please read the neutral point of view policy if you haven't already done so. — Nivix talk 19:09, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


The doubt is not from a user on a message-board.

If you have a look at the references, you will see that the doubt is from the Stabburet webpage.

It lists the binding-agent to be soy-protein on one webpage.

And gelatine based on swine on another webpage.

What I'll do is that I'll add an article from the newspaper Dagbladet, from some years back, and then it should be possilbe to see that this has an issue that has been brought up before.

And this is so many years ago, so the company shouldn't be in doubt about which binding-agent they are using.

Since it shouldn't be any doubt of what one of Scandinavias most eaten contains.

Especially not from the ones producing it.

But the point is, that the producer itself, is in doubt regarding what the product contains.

This is the issue and the point here.

I'll try to refrase it a bit.

And when I've linked to the produces webpage, and use that as documentation, then one can't say that it's something wrong with the research.

You have to say that this should be good enough research.

I can't really see it any other way.