Canvas 

whether or not a post is a canvas violation is rather controversial - i disagree with your assessment that his post was in violation of canvas and therefore that makes your action blanking.  

The person involved in the RFA is also highly controversial, which could easily lead to that misconception.  A subjective analysis of said user shows that they should have been banned years ago for incessant pov-pushing, but he's so good at doing it below the notice of the admins (and he has an admin in his pocket) that the problem article stays a problem.  

the user in the RFA is one of three users that are the reason i A) do trust wikipedia as far as i can throw my house B) don't edit wikipedia anymore.  Wikipedia is about reaching consensus... consensus and turth are not always the same thing.

So please - never remove content from my talk page again.

PS for the love of $DIETY turn down your archival rate