Unusually poor sourcing - mainly from the subject publication

edit

This article, about the publication Free Malaysia Today, appears to have been sourced entirely from that very publication. Except for the small "Controversy" section, and a single reference to a website-rating site, ALL other references cited come from the very publication that the article is about!

This is wholly inappropriate and inadequate for Wikipedia, blatantly violating WP:NPOV, and raises strong questions about the validity and credibility of this article, and the independence and neutrality of its author. Please find additional, substantial, credible, English-language sources for this article. Otherwise, it is a reasonable candidate for deletion -- notwithstanding the substantial online presence of Free Malaysia Today.

Penlite (talk) 10:55, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Article overhauled & expanded - still needs better references

edit

I've attempted to greatly improve the sourcing of the information on this site, but have found it difficult to locate independent online sources that address the content already here. So I have largely added new content, with references that I was able to find.

Nevertheless, this site remains far too dependent upon references to the subject itself: Free Malaysia Today. This needs improvement.

Penlite (talk) 15:38, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply