"

Deleted Material & Kripalu P.R. Staff
Sadly one editor insists on deleting five sentences, neutrally factual & sourced to Mass. Dept. of Environmental Protection, the federal EPA, and the New York Times. This same editor makes unsupportable accusations of ""Conflict of Interest."" Interesting/ironic that Kripalu article was also somewhat recently edited by a Kripalu executive, who similarly objected to well-sourced & neutral material from IRS documents. 
So, the Kripalu P.R. people are apparently watching.

Here are the deleted five sentences:
The state had reported in 2003 that this subsurface [public drinking water] system was subject to a ""high threat"" of contamination from possible pesticide overuse or potential fuel spills.[9] The federal Environmental Protetion Agency listed nine reporting and monitoring violations for that same system between 1998 and 2001.[10]A 2008 report said Kripalu's well-based water-supply system contained one form of uranium and two forms of radium, in amounts below legal limits, but above federal health guidelines.[11][12][13]In 2007, the state set an August 2009 deadline for retirement of one of Kripalu's wells, due to health hazards exacerbated by a construction project in the area of the well.[14][15] '''

Removing neutrally presented factual & relevant material is, of course, harmful to the interests of Wikipedia readers.
(to be edited).

  
Calamitybrook, you might read some of the many, many responses made over time about these issues.  You might consider wp:dispute resolution or wp:RfC to gather support for your position. However, your abusive behaviour is not likely to draw much in the way of help: see again, guidance on your talk page, this talk page, wp:COIN, wp:WQA. Please follow it.- Sinneed "