BRD 

Please don't revert something without discussion after I undid it. I disagreed with your change to the Judicial activism article because I believe the sources don't make the same conclusion. You should use that as an invitation for discussion; but simply reverting it isn't appropriate in this circumstance. Please take the time to discuss the issue before reverting it. Also, I think you did a disservice to the article by removing page cites for no apparent reason other than that you interpreted the template instructions in a novel new way. Those sources are cited multiple times I might add.   
If you would please look before you leap, you would see that I already extensively talked at the talk page.  Moreover, my edit to the article carefully addressed your concern by putting the pertinent quotation into the footnote. Please check it out.  Thanks so much.  
Not exactly "extensive" but yes, I had replied to you on the talk page. Let's discuss the merits there.   
Thanks for joining the article talk page discussion at .  

 Using BLPs to pursue real-life grudges 

It's really inappropriate to use Wikipedia's biographical content as a platform to pursue real-life personal grudges. I'm sure you would never stoop to doing any such thing, so we're good, right? '''''' Talk 
Correct.  Please respect my previous request that you not comment at this talk page.