What made the reference link unnecessary?

So basically, you are claiming that tiny bit of information as 100% from the playerbase because you've confirmed a PART of it? I'm sorry, but until ALL of the borrowed information is confirmed by the playerbase, this is plagiarism. I don't know how the mod staff treat such claims, but it is plagiarism plain and simple.

This is not common knowledge (published on more than five different resources at time of original writing). It is not 100% based off an individual's observations in the game. And it does not have a ref link to where the information originally came from (even though it was paraphrased).

Just thought I'd point that out. I'm going to undo another mod's removal, but please consider that before brushing this entire thing off.

Don't undo mod's removals. (Was that a typo? Did you mean not??)

Plagiarism isn't a concern in this context. Once tanino posts his new post about this discussion, though, we can discuss this further there. (I don't know if it will be in this thread or a new one, but I will allow him the main thread for it if he so chooses.)

Yeah that was a typo haha. I'm not going to undo that again, seeing as we're all on different standings on this and it'll just turn into an edit war if I tried to anyway.

Guess I'll wait on that thread to come along to give my ideas and views on this.