The comment read:
This is completely opinion-based. You can see the opinions in your links, and judge their trustworthiness for yourself.
The comment was flagged as "rude or offensive". I looked at it and I did not perceive it as such, and dismissed the flag.
You then posted this question. I have since deleted the comment, despite not agreeing that it is "rude and off-putting", because comments are "second-class citizens" here, and are rarely worth preserving.
The main proposition of the comment - i.e. that the question, as it stood, was opinion-based, was a reasonable objection that I agreed with. Opinion-based questions are off-topic here, and so suggesting you "judge for yourself" rather than ask the skeptics community to collect evidence is fair.
Since you asked this meta-question, you edited the original question, and then I edited it further, to remove the opinion-based aspects, and the question has happily now been re-opened.
Is commentary, and subsequent putting a question on hold, going to be a reoccurring theme when someone asks if there are reputable sources than ones provided?
You've drawn the wrong lesson here. Commentary and having your question put on hold is appropriate when someone asks an opinion-based question.