Nope. Still no competing reference I see. You keep adding unverified material, while I'm proposing a source to back my version. Read Wikipedia:Verifiability. Let me point out some salient points to you. "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true." - ie, you need to provide a source that justifies including Albert. "This policy requires that all quotations and anything challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed in the form of an inline citation that directly supports the material" - again, since I'm challenging the inclusion of Albert, you need to provide a source. "Anything that requires but lacks a source may be removed" - that's what I've been doing but you have been violating policy. "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material." - you have never shown that Albert operated any kind of independent command. Instead you keep adding him while not adding anybody else at the same level of command. You have never provided any kind of explanation for this.
 Let me be very clear here: I'm going to add accurate, cited content. If you remove it, you will be violating a core policy and I'll take you straight to DR. I've tolerated as much as I'm going to from you, and it stops now.  •T•C•E•