So you are indicating that a summons is necessary? That makes even less sense...
> [Citation Needed] indicates that it needs a supporting source to validate the statement.
But, logically, the person making the comment is the supporting source. That is, after all, why you are taking time to speak to them instead of some other source. If you find another source is more valid to what you seek, why not go directly to it instead? A middleman offers nothing of value.
> It is commonly used on Wikipedia to denote statements on a page that do not have proper supporting information
Sure. The entire purpose of Wikipedia is to aggregate information about topics from external sources. Citations are needed. It would not serve its intended purpose without them. But a wiki is quite unlike a discussion forum. A discussion forum is a venue to speak with the primary source...
...which is what ended up happening anyway, making the "[Citation Needed]" of any interpretation even stranger.
Maybe this page will help us come to common understanding: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/citation-needed
I'd have offered you a citation, but repeating what someone else said seems rather silly.
> Since gaining its catchphrase status, "citation needed" has been used in online discussion forums to humorously point out biased or baseless statements made by others.
So what you are saying is that someone thought could be funny by posting a tired meme? That may be true, but still doesn't make sense.
This is, at best, very fucking stupid. At worst, it is fairly bigoted and more than a little bit offensive. It is in the same category of Victorian pseudo-science that gave us phrenology and eugenics.
"[Citation needed]" was merely meant as a shorter and much more polite way of implying all of the above. I can be much less polite if that's something you're interested in.
I'll grant you that it is shorter. But how is leaning on a meme that stopped being funny in 2007 to call attention to your concerns polite? That would be considered asshole behaviour anywhere else. Especially when you consider that if one is not familiar with the meme and ends up taking it at face value it is a request that is impossible to fulfill, backing one into a corner. That is not good faith participation.
If you have concerns that are worth raising with another party, surely it is worth speaking to that other party like a normal human being?
> it is fairly bigoted and more than a little bit offensive.
I'll extrapolate from this that you are really trying to suggest that the other party might be what we oft label a troll. In which case perhaps you can make a case that they are not deserving of normal human treatment, however they are also not deserving of your time, so no reply would be made in that case anyway.