:You didn't step on any toes, don't worry. I reverted you because in the sentence attributed to Burkett, you added phrases ("most likely", "theoretical") which aren't really supported by Burkett's work. Burkett asserts that the author did use those three sources, not that he most likely did. And he doesn't call Q "theoretical"; he says it could have been one document or a few, but asserts it as real, not possible.  
 :The other edit at the beginning of the sentence was fine, and not really worthy of reversion of itself.  
 :So this is all based on WP policies of verifiability: we try to stick to what our reliable sources tell us, and if something is attributed to a particular source, we can't say something the source doesn't say.  
 :I do hope this explains the process to your satisfaction, and let me know if I can be of any help.