" 

 ==Genesis of the current edit war:== 

 *JJL started the current edit war when he 
 seemingly ignored the years of consensus and the lengthy discussions that 
 produced that consensus lead sentence (as well as the warning on the talk 
 page alerting him to that consensus) with a trite and dismissive edit 
 summary (this is clearly advocacy""death"" is a highly charged term here 
 and not a medical one (does an embryo 'die'?), which ignored the hard work 
 of dozens and dozens and dozens of editors over the years.  

 *Lionelt noted the problem with JJL's edit (lack of consensus and not 
 respecting the genesis of the long-standing lead) and restored the 
 long-standing consensus lead sentence. 

 *JJL ignored Lionelt and reverted Lionelt's reversion, thereby restoring 
 his disruptive edit (although JJL incorrectly claimed in his edit summary 
 that it was not a reversion).  

 *MastCell removed the POV tag (despite the bold warnings all over the 
 page about the history of the lead sentence and its inclusion of the word 
 death and despite Lionelt's mention of the lack of consensus), falsely 
 claiming that ""a single editor"" objected to the deletion (and apparently 
 MastCell considered it was good to have a POV tag when some editors wanted 
 the word ""death"" removed, but after the word ""death"" was removed without 
 consensus, it was suddenly a bad idea to have a POV tag?). 

 *Michael_C_Price restored the long-standingconsensus lead sentence. 

 *The article was then frozen for 3 days by Fastily. 

 *The article was then semi-protected by Andrew_c. 

 *Someone added a modifier to the word death. 

 *JJL restored the long-term consensus lead, giving the rationale that the 
 a potential change to the lead sentence to remove death was under discussion 
 (which was a good call).  

 * NuclearWarfare removed the long-standing consensus lead by removing the 
 word death and substituting a reference to viability (despite objections 
 and a clear lack of any new consensus). The 
 talk page shows that there was no consensus for this 
 controversial and contentious change.  

 *Str1977 restored the long-standing consensus 
 lead, which was (and still is) the most recent consensus lead.      

 *NuclearWarfare added some cherry-picked 
 references to the article (over the course of a few days) that would 
 support NuclearWarfare's desired non-consensus version of the lead sentence. 

 *Jmh649 (aka Doc James) deleted death and added 
 a viability reference, which did not enjoy consensus and was a contentious 
 edit, coyly referencing the cherry-picked references cited by NuclearWarfare 
 (""altered to reflect references""). A few minutes before he made this edit, 
 Jmh649/DocJames was invovled in 
 substantive discussion on the talk page in which there 
 was clearly no consensus for the change, and in fact an objection to the 
 change was made with copious medical references to verify the validity of 
 the long-standing consensus version. Yet he made the edit anyway. 

 *JJL jumpd in to copy-edit (and endorse) the new wording.   

 *DMSBel tried to come up with a compromise that acknowledged the validity 
 of the long-standing consensus, but included the concerns of the handful of 
 edit warriors (JJL, Nuclear, and DocJames). 

 *[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion&diff;=next