:::It is both uncivil and disruptive of you to misrepresent the applicable policy.  The standard for removing a prod notice is "If you do not agree that the article should be deleted without discussion," and nothing I did conflicts with that standard.  I would note, however, that your prod nomination which I challenged was out of compliance with the prod policy in all but the most technical sense; the policy states quite clearly the prodder should "Tailor your reason to each individual article; generic messages are not helpful. Use an informative edit summary." Your explanation was not tailored to the individual article, and could not have been more generic.  Most of the rest of your comment is little more than a surly violation of WP:AGF.  And if you are the middle-aged paralegal you describe yourself to be, I'm sure you are aware of the importance of accurately and properly citing rules you invoke; you should do so here with regard to your rather eccentric descriptions of supposed burden-of-proof requirements.