I agree that this dispute should've been handled by discussion, rather than reverting.  And as I said, several times now, the other side refused to discuss it and answer my question.  They were the ones breaking the rules, not me.

Regarding personal attacks, the content wasn't the issue.  The issue was the interpretation of the rules.  In that case, there's nothing wrong with attacking someone's interpretation of the rules.  It goes to the substance of the dispute.  Let me be clear, if I haven't been already.  I believe that I was quite correct and innocent in my actions.  I don't lack for boldness.  If some Wikipedia administrators want to block me despite the fact that I'm right, they're free to do that.  But it doesn't make me any less right.  In this case, the wrong side of the fence is the popular side.  It's certainly not the first time. -