::to  you are absolutely right. We had a fruitful discussion and cooperative editing, you and I (at least I had; I hope it was so for you too). Your contribution is much appreciated, you helped to change the wording there to sound much better. Then the objection was raised to the use of the word "consecutive" to which I had to provide counter arguments, and the ensuing discussion was needlessly long-winded, because that word is necessary in that context. IMO.  
 ::Of course the removal in question was done by the other editor in this thread, under "NOTREPOSITORY" heading on July 18th. Which in itself woudn't be a problem if they hadn't refused to engage in a fruitful and cooperative discussion afterwards, but hey, it doesn't matter, there's always an option of just giving up.  
 ::Their attempt to mislead is really... what's word? Not conducive to the spirit of cooperation and mutual trust here.