"Comment on content, not on other contributors or people." 

These are fine sentiments, to which I will certainly try to comply with in future. Please can you clarify whether or not the next time I notice a specific editor such as Davey proposing an article for deletion based on the fact he can't find any sources, and it turns out he either hasn't looked very hard, or hasn't even considered print sources, could you tell me how I might be permitted to express that opinion without being blocked? Or is the whole arena of talking about what people have or have not done in the course of their Wikipedia work, completely off limits?

Also, please clarify whether or not you think all the people who have commented about the fact that supposedly if I spent as much time 'fixing' articles as I did complaining about the fact they keep screwing them up, Wikipedia would have more/better articles. Are they due a block for talking about me for personal attacks? If not, can they be blocked for saying things which are clearly untrue? (I've spent at most two hours criticising Dave's actions, yet to write these articles properly complete with issue numbers and ISBNs, it would take many times that amount of time (and indeed effort).

In anticipation of you completely ignoring me, or otherwise giving an answer which isn't really an answer (no offence, but this does seem like the usual way things work here), thanks in advance, and Merry Christmas.