I apologize for cursing you out.  I lost my temper and it was unacceptable.  I'm completely deserved a block  (although i think you had no right to give it to me).  That said, looking at the last few pages of your contributions, nearly all your edit summaries are "MoSed", "reverted unexplained and unsourced changes," "tidied," "copyedit," or similar. I'm sure I was overstating the case because  I was angry, but this does seem to be your main activity in the main space on wikipedia (not that there's anything wrong with that - it's good to have people who copyedit and so forth, but I think my basic claim was more or less true).  And I don't misunderstand the way wikipedia works.  I've been here for four years, and I've never run into anyone demanding sources for utterly uncontroversial statements the way that you are.  If we are obsessive about this kind of thing, wikipedia will never grow, and it is completely counterproductive to revert unsourced statements of what is essentially common knowledge.  And I think my understanding of this is a lot closer to the way wikipedia actually works than yours is, which is based on a completely non-existent perfect world idea of what wikipedia should be.