Look, I'm begging you, please try to understand this individual case. I'm pointing out that since the fact is so well known (regardless of whether wikipedia editors are ignorant of the fact) that it doesn't need a citation. It just looks messy and could become chaotic in the future. The essential problem here is that you don't seem to understand that this is an individual case and doesn't come under the jurisdiction of that policy you have mentioned. And I wouldn't need to make personal attacks if users actually thought about what they were typing, rather than behaving like mindless wiki drones.