well gladly wikipedia is not an actual source

wikipedia is very valid

its checked every day by thousands of people

and it has sources of its own

asuch as you know

THE OXFORD DICTIONARY

wikipedia isnt valid

yes it is

its a very valid source

and they did not create the oxford dictionary-

they sourced it

ffs

okay then name one scholarly paper

in the article

that uses a wikipedia link

in their bibliography

its not used as a source

okay

so its not a valid source then?

they have sources in the description

those are the sources they use

okay then why dont you use those sources

the wikipedia

ARE ARTICLES

you dont use an article as a source

you can

actually

name one scholarly article using washington post tho

because right now

i also used ing.org

okay i will

As a source of a main source

ok

What seems to be the problem here

let me help

he thinks sharia law isnt that bad

Ok, that seems pretty extreme

Who

Do you really believe Sharia isn't "so bad"?

Black oger needs to be caught by Police

Or is he trying to trick you