Also to say my content was contested as unreliable because of POV does not show that my source was unrealiable it just show that I did not understand how to use wikipedia. I am one of the only experts on this line aside from Wind. Krabbe only cited Wind and Brause. To date, I'm the other source. Kaufmans book is not on this topic specifically. So my lack of understanding of how wikipedia works is ihardlythinkso's pejorative for judging my source as unreliable. That does not make my source unreliable it just means i did not know how to use wikipedia so I inserted POV. You already clearly imply POV here even though your source on Krabbe states the contrary on a line you say has a decisive advantage. Then you have some things here that are UNSOURCED and UON article is a dead link now so you should perform your secretarial task and remove it and then remove anything that attempts to source it because your NEON GOD states it must not be WP:RS or maybe you are just specifically discriminating against me and now my persona is judged despite the quality of my work and the quality of my name in the chess community. I should not have to worry about being called reliable. I am a well known master analyst author player who has been published in over at least 5 different magazines texts cited in books. Should I list IM Scheerers Diemer book where he cites me as his primary credit?!? Even though it has nothing to do with this content?! You dont hold your own aricle to the same standard so instead you are being hypocritical perjorative ihardlythinkso 166.137.88.42