Sorry, your protest goes unnoticed. For you to protest about my characterization, there would have to be a qualified adjective next to your name. Or a description of a series of actions grounded on blatantly false information.  What i claim is that you are re-engaging in a series of edits and deletes, which is factually correct and therefore morally permissible.
I take no sides. I see things how they are. You never cite your sources, and as such, i do not feel compelled to prolong my answer any further.  Good day.
  
 

Per wikipedia policy, i am letting myself know that I am one of the designated mediation parties for a current article dispute