==Arbitration enforcement on Falun Gong article?== 
 Hello Vassyana. Please see the latest discussion, and the edit history of the Falun Gong article. I think the diffs will make things clear. 20kb of text was removed from the article after some editors discussed it a bit; a sentence was put at the top directing readers to subpages. I reverted this and asked for more discussion and consensus to be reached. Neither I or Olaf had participated in discussion of the changes. Originally they were set forward as "suggestions", and then  boldly implemented them. In itself, this may not be such a problem, given that it's clear these were just suggestions, and someone went out on a limb to see whether it was acceptable. Ideally, you know, in this kind of situation there would be a lot more discussion before making such huge changes to this article, given all the acrimony surrounding it. Anyway, then I reverted it because it was not discussed properly, but it has been reverted again. I'm unwilling to do another revert right now, because I would basically consider that edit warring. Peredman is now seeking discussion on the "new structure," but I will not participate in any discussion of the new structure until the deleted text is restored. It would be meaningless. I understand the current circumstances to be an unfortunate and gross abuse of the consensus-buliding process. Since you are the mediator, can you please advise some course of action, or take up a course of action yourself. The alternative is that I could file an AE request, I guess, but I'm not sure that will be best. At the moment the article needs to be restored to how it was 8 hours ago (I think), before the 20kb of text was removed. Then the discussion can begin.