" 

 ==WP:FILM January 2011 Newsletter== 
 The January 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing!   •   

 == February Disambig challenge == 

 Greetings! I've challenged my fellow disambiguators to help knock out more than a thousand disambig links a day for the month of February, and every bit helps. Please check out the list at Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links and see if you can get in the game for this month. Cheers!    

 == Re: Good article nominations == 

 Thanks for letting me know. ''''''   
 :No problem. )   

  
 == P90x Link == 

 Hello, I noticed you removed the link to fitnesstrainingreview from the P90x article.  First, let me explain that I know Chelsea from that article, as she was in a class of mine.  She was always talking to me about p90x whenever I was complaining about my shape.  She gave me a link to a website she was starting (fitnesstrainingreview) as well some other info on P90x.  About a week later I was doing more research on P90x and came across the wiki article which had the phrase ""The program has three “rotations”—classic, lean, and doubles"" said citation needed.  Fast forward a few months, I ended up buying P90x and doing more p90x searches on google when I considered creating my own blog to hold myself accountable.  I saw that the p90x wiki was still saying citation needed for that quite and remembered reading that exactly on Chelsea's blog on her new post.  I then decided to link her site in the middle of the summer. 

 Now your reasoning was that it was not a reputable source.  First I want to begin by asking what exactly is a reputable source as far as a workout video goes?  I personally know that Chelsea is about as filled with p90x knowledge as anyone possibly could be.  She has been able to answer any question I throw at her immediately about p90x.  She even leads p90x workouts on our campus.  Recently she was talking to me about people who had emailed her questions and mentioned finding her site via wikipedia and thanked her so much for all of her help, .  Lastly I wanted to say that this link has been on the wiki page for about 6 months and has been through just shy of 200 revisions.   

 I honestly think that taking this link and source away from the wiki article is just hurting potential visitors of the wiki.  As you can probably tell I am very inexperienced with wikipedia, and I probably wasn't supposed to just undo people's edits.  I am sorry I did not contact you here first.  Let me know what you think about all of this, and have a nice day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by   •  12:44, 7 February 2011 
 :Hi, don't worry about being inexperienced - everyone is at first! I don't know Chelsea, but I don't doubt what you say that she has a lot of knowledge about the P90X, and I'm sure her blog is a great resource for people interested in it. In the real world, as you seem to have found, it may be that her blog can be considered ""reliable"" and ""reputable"". On Wikipedia though, our guidelines for what to use as a source are very strict. You can read about them at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Blogs are very rarely considered ""reliable"" enough to use in articles here. They are often self-published sources, meaning that somebody writes something and publishes it themselves, for example on their blog or website. Sometimes people write books and publish them themselves. They don't have anyone whose job it is to check over their work, and they are not backed up by a reliable company. What Chelsea has on her blog might be factually correct, but how can we know that for sure. Someone else could write a blog and say things that are incorrect, or even worse, they could lie, and then they could add their blog as a source