`  (cont.) Unfortunately, the recent editing of Wikipedia:Public domain does not help this situation.  I had done a search for ``images of Nazi regime U.S. copyright law`` and been directed via Wapedia (Wikipedia for mobile telephones) to the following section, which was edited recently and has many missing citations and cannot therefore be used as a source for determining the propriety of how to license these images.  See: .  That is a copy of the ``content guideline`` Wikipedia:Public domain, which has been edited recently by the uploader of the images whose licensing is under review; such edits are highly questionable, as the ``content guideline`` appears to be edited to support a position re: specific images currently under review (a past or potential edit war): see Wikipedia:Edit warring and Wikipedia:Disruptive editing for guidance.  Editing content guidelines and policy pages in Wikipedia when involved in a difference of viewpoints re: specific content is highly problematic and frowned upon, especially if it is done w/o following WP:CITE and WP:V#Sources.  (cont.)I've added the missing citations templates and an editorial interpolation and a comment explaining the templates on the talk page at in that article's talk page.  This is an alert to the potential problem of a feedback loop occurring in Wikipedia to validate images whose status is still under review pertaining to WP:IUP and WP:PUI.  This is merely an expression of concern; see Wikipedia:Guidelines for controversial articles, already in a template at top.  When adding material to controversial articles or controversial sections of articles or content guidelines in Wikipedia, it is still necessary to avoid violating WP:NOR and to follow WP:V and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view; these are core editing policies in Wikipedia.    `