Looking at the editing Histories of Goethena/Propol
For the interested parties that are watching this talk page and article, it would 
be useful to look at the nature and tone of edits which  and 
 have done in the last few weeks and judge the loving kindness they
impart on the Duckworth article, vers the near libelous editing on the Roskam article.

This just pointing out "facts" and not in volition of WP:AGF in quoting that policy it says...

This policy does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary. Actions inconsistent with good faith include vandalism, sockpuppetry, and lying. Assuming good faith also does not mean that no action by editors should be criticized, but instead that criticism should not be attributed to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice. Accusing the other side in a conflict of not assuming good faith, without showing reasonable supporting evidence, is another form of failing to assume good faith.

So, any honest hearted admin, in light of the John Seigenthaler, Sr Debacle, will not
surely not allow the kind of bias editing that now taking place.  So, in the mean time, and until there is some ruling tendered from higher athority, I will lovingly protect the Roskam article as   and  lovingly protect the Duckworth article from any, and all negative edits, even edits that are well cited, per wikipedia policy, I will do the same for the Roskam article.  

Again, I am willing for dialog with other editors regarding good faith edits, but the two editors which I have mentioned above, due again, to their well documented editing histories on the Duckworth and Roskam, I will revert most of what they put up unless those edits conform, IMHO, to Wikipolicy to WP:BLP  WP:NPOV  WP:NPOV#Undue weight.  and finely  WP:SENSE.