Langus, Wikipedia policy mandates that articles should be self-contained. If an assertion is used in an article, both the assertion and its use must be justified in that article. The assertion that "Britain re-established its rule" has never been made in scholarly texts and is a WP:FRINGE theory. Jimbo Wales has stated:  

 *If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts;  
 *If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents;  
 *If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in  
 Wikipedia regardless of whether it is true or not and regardless of whether you can prove it or not, except perhaps in some ancillary article. 

 We have not been provided with citations to either reference texts or prominent authors supporting the viewpoint that Britain re-established its rule in 1833. Therefore the claim does not belong in Wikipedia. 

 In your discussions with WCM, he just muddled the waters by taking the debate to whether it is true or not that Britain ruled the islands before 1833. We need not delve into that. The only thing that matters here is if the reliable sources available support that view. And the reliable sources, by an OVERWHELMING majority (sorry for the caps, but I NEED to stress that), support the view that the 1833 events were an occupation.