:: OK I'm sorry if I missed your other point.  It's just that I've been trying to follow this discussion for several days and it might actually be better if everybody used bullet points (the horror!) rather than discursive paragraphs. I didn't mean to single you out — I'm just as irritated with Isarig's style as I am with yours. However, I think Isarig does have a point: until we actually check what the facts are, it's one person's claim against another person's claim. This doesn't mean Cole is a liar or incompetent; it's just that in the in the course of collecting the references WP needed to support statements in WP,  this particular piece is not available. Now granted, I agree presumption is heavily on Cole's side here, and if he is wrong, this should be very easy to prove (as you say if he were wrong this would be very embarrassing). But this kind of reasoning though useful for some purposes, is not sufficient to justify this presumption for WP. Imagine that we were talking about the validity of some mathematical formula. Until a widely accepted justification is published, I don't care who says it's true, we can't claim it's true.  

 :: But maybe this point is moot anyway, since we're not actually talking about changing the article.