AN/I seems a bit extreme, particularly if you assume good-faith editing on their part (I know you might be struggling with that, but  I happen to think that's true).  maybe make a request for mediation?  I don't know enough about the subject matter or history here to really make judgments about the worth of any particular article; I'm just concerned by the steadfast resistance to adding critical viewpoints, and the obvious efforts to downplay what criticism is there.  don't get me wrong, I'm still open to the possibility that they have valid reasons for this.  I'm just not satisfied with what's been said so far.
If I were you, I'd take a couple of days and write up an iron-clad criticism section; gather all the reputable sources you can find and include them.  then post it here on the talk page so that people don't have to bother looking at diffs.