List of common misconceptions

I feel your behaviour on this matter is bordering on inappropriate, specifically that you are assuming an authority on dictating procedure that is not in any way supported by policy.   Swordfish made that revert on the basis of wanting reliable sourcing (he had not followed the wikilinks included in the added text to see that the point is more than adequately sourced and not at all controversial); I directed him to those sources and he has made no objection to my reintroducing the content so far.  The fact that I made my case in an edit summary is utterly irrelevant  there is no policy requiring me to start a superfluous talk page entry as opposed to making the sources known through any other venue or means of discussion on the project.    And in approaching the matter in this way, I in no way violated the principle of WP:Consesus, to which I am fully committed as an editor; had Swordfish reverted again, I would have opened a discussion on the article's talk page, but it's not your place to just assume his reaction to my new evidence and insist on a particular course of action in resolving the (non)issue between the two of us.  Your actions in this case, and especially your tone in your edit summaries, seem to suggest that you feel you are in a position to dictate the methodologies of other editors with regard to work flow and communication, but in this case you have no policy argument to support this behaviour and no special position in the community entitling you to interfere in this manner, especially when you had no reason to believe the matter was not already dealt with to the satisfaction of the original parties involved.

This was a discussion based on WP:Verifiability alone, a matter that, until someone tells me otherwise, seems to have been resolved.  If you decide that you have issue with the sources in question, how they should be referenced, or the content itself, fine I urge you to open a talk page discussion on it.  However, if you continue to meddle and revert my content again on no other basis than trying to enforce your preferred procedure, clearly an administrator will have to straighten the matter out.