You are Wiki-Lawyering, and frankly if anybody is doing the harassing here, it's you.  You have repeatedly minimized my arguments by claiming that I am Sockpuppeting, Meatpuppeting, and making personal attacks when I am attacking the material of the article and its source.  
'You are passive aggressive' is not an egregious personal attack, and 'you didn't read what I wrote and you are being deliberately obtuse' isn't a personal attack at all.  (Seriously, How is "You're deliberately not reading what I wrote" possibly offensive to anybody?)  
I didn't come here to create drama, I didn't claim that I did.  I claimed that a particular website made me aware of something on wikipedia that I thought was wrongly included in an article.  I've made legitimate criticisms, and my comments are directly responsible for the creation of the Crucifixion in Art page.  I argued civilly enough and generated enough consensus among the majority of wiki users to remove the offending material from the original Crucifixion page and have it moved to a new page.  When I got around to looking at that new page I found that it had not been cleaned up and contained questionable claims from an unreliable tertiary source, so I made an argument on the discussion page and removed the offending material.  Because I didn't make an edit summary, I found my revision rather rudely reverted by a member of one of your user:groups.  I reacted and Alan pointed out my mistake: a simple oversight by a novice user, one that might have been cleared up when I read Alan's talk page had you not immediately jumped in and made baseless claims against me.  68.114.130.234