" 
 :::Hi DGG, thanks for stepping into this. The removed content, per Penom and Wayiran (and a cursory review of some by me), (a) was not supported by the sources and/or (b) was used in a way to push a POV. Discussion regarding this took place above, with Penom and Wayiran disagreeing on the source use and content. Thus, the problems began.  
 :::Wiqi55 is also making additional determinations which make no sense to me, for instance, not including Lewis based on how old the source is, yet including older sources of his choosing. This too I believe goes right back to other editors' claims of Wiqi55 pushing a POV by doing so. Your review of the above for yet another voice on such would be greatly appreciated. Best,  | / "