That is one explanation. Though I think there's just a certain editor who's more prone to making sloppy edits to push POV. I'm stumbling across stuff that has been in this article awhile now that has no basis in the sources that are cited to support it. I'm new, maybe that happens all the time, but I think that excuse falls apart upon investigating contributions. I'm not touching the section again, but I'm pretty sure that if the new edit doesn't achieve consensus it ought to be removed and discussed until a conclusion is reached. I could be wrong though. 70.36.233.104