That's even worse. Pre-emptively claiming that no consensus exists while in the middle of an RfC is just outright disruptive and unhelpful. Basically that equates to him saying "there's no consensus on this, and you're idiots for trying to come to one, so let's leave the article title as it [which co-incidentally happens to be that author's preferred choice from previous debates]" Surely you can see how transparently unscrupulous that appears. 85.211.130.47