::::::That is because it was fully protected, and I was hoping that the editor who dishonestly misrepresented the sources would correct his own error. There was never consensus for the current map or the current claim that the mountain is "in Israel" as the infobox now says. This was introduced and reverted then edit-warred into the article by sockpuppet IPs and the, oh, lets say 'coincidental or convenient to step around the obvious, return of an editor who hadnt made an edit in over a year and hasnt made one since. The article was then fully protected. I did not wish to continue edit-warring, so I left it in and raised the issue of the falsification of sources here and the inherent POV push in attempting to insert an extreme minority claim as fact in the infobox. Apparently you see no problem with retaining the work of a POV-pusher who distorts the sources and a collection of sockpuppets. Because if you do claim to want to follow BRD and have consensus, you would restore the article as it had been prior to the edit-warring to insert propaganda into it. Just a thought. '''''' -