"
GWH, I understand that my edit summaries were inappropriate and if you blocked me for that reason only I would not complain. However, you mentioned disregard for talk page consensus.
Here, you can see that my request for sources to be verified devolves into Ramdrake requiring me to find a quote from the cites stating the opposite of what it's supposed to support, and refusing to provide a quote supporting the statement in question. Also false and hypocritical allegations of IDIDN'THERETHAT, trolling, OR, ""twist[ing] legitimate sources to try to make them say the opposite of what they're actually saying"", and a claim that out of field scholars are more reliable because they are more ""secondary"". Is this how ""consensus"" is formed on WP? How sad.   "