::::Let me, my friend, put this another way, if, as I intuit, you have a commendable sensitivity to the honourable application of  rules. You had edited the text out, and expected that the proper procedure for John Nagle should have been to canvas the community here, and see if there was a relevant majority that might approve of his reverting you, and re-introducing the material. This certainly was one possible way of going about it (one I myself, as an editor, preferrred to employ when active in actually editing pages, and not, as now, simply advising). You are both within your rights, but it has since emerged that John Nagle's reintroduction of the material is what most of the editors now active here approve of. So, even were he to, as a gesture to you, to self-revert to your edit of the 6th. and await consensus by calling for a vote, the result would be the one we have now. I.e. four editors would say that the material you elided is well-sourced, and germane to a full understanding of the JIDF, and therefore would be put back in. Regards