Frustration with repeated deletions and un-sourced additions by Jrkso

Jrkso,

I would like to think that you are editing in good faith - but you make it hard!  You seem to just pull ideas out of your head, delete well-sourced facts (repeatedly), and replace them with your personal concoctions - sources be damned.

Latest of many examples (for more, see Talk page, above):

You have now decided that the Taliban killed Sitara Achakzai, so you just plopped that into the article in the "Government and Politics" section.  You provide no sources for this "new discovery", no explanation.  You just went for it (adding bolded words, below): 

"Women in public life in many parts of the country are subject to routine threats and intimidation, according to a December, 2009 report by Human Rights Watch. Several high profile women have been assassinated, but their killers have not been brought to justice. When Sitara Achakzai, an outspoken and courageous human rights defender and politician, was murdered by the Taliban in April 2009, her death was seen as another warning to all women who are active in public life."

Do you honestly believe that you are contributing in a worthwhile way to Wikipedia with these methods?  Your seem to be intent not so much on re-writing the article, but on trying to re-write history itself.  No sources, no explanations, no sense.

And it gets worse.  On the edit page, where you again deleted facts, you seem to be explaining a deletion with this comment: 'Danieldis47, such a statement ... a "transparent election is not possible." is POV ... how can that not be possible?)"  

Man - It's a quote from the candidate himself!  It's HIS explanation for why he quit (not mine!)  That's why it is in quotes!  Would you delete an excerpt from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address on Lincoln's page because it's his point of view (POV?)??

I am entirely frustrated here.   

I suggest we seek third-party mediation.