Talk:DJ Pon-3/@comment-3218812-20130227215052/@comment-4531340-20130228172016

Ok, I think I see what you're saying, and hm... the only thing I can think of is that that thread was mentioned in a reliable article, and so became ok to use, but then what I'm wondering is why the article wasn't linked to instead, because surely it would've had a link to that.