:Pretty sure that they (i.e. User:B-watchmework) were referring to the discussion above in general.  We haven't discussed every statement cited to every source, but multiple editors have agreed that the article was better off after large parts of it were removed.  I think User:B-watchmework's hope  and mine  would be that you attempt to justify the material you want to put in, piecewise, here on talk.  It's a simple fact of WP:CONSENSUS that your edits won't stick unless other editors trust you, so that's another sense, complementary to WP:BURDEN, in which the burden rests with you (or any editor of a controversial article, especially one who has made multiple contentious edits).  Thank you for your receptiveness to leaving out things like the sources User:Prolog pointed out; as for the rest, it's better to first suggest on talk, get agreement, and then add/restore the material.  That's a common practice with controversial topics... it's not a bad-faith, busy-work demand; it's just how edits end up sticking.