"

Etiquette
Your statement ""I keep my conviction that I'm on the truth: that you two are members of some racist organization"" on this edit directed toward User:Dark Tichondrias  is an accusation that two users are racists, making it against Wikipedia's policy on etiquette.  Wikipedia's policy on etiquette suggests to not accuse other users of being racist. 
WP:Wikiettiquete says:
Terms like ""racist,"" ""sexist"" or even ""poorly written"" make people defensive. This makes it hard to discuss articles productively. If you have to criticize, you must do it in a polite and constructive manner.
This seems to be the issue of dispute. Yet racism is at the heart of this discussion, specially because DT and Thulean are percieved by all the rest as people with such an agenda. 
I'm pondering to start a project called WP:Honesty: Say things clear (without falling in insults), don't hide in word games, don't make threats that make no sense (bravados), don't edit capriciously ignoring the discussion, etc. Play fair and demand others to do the same. 
You pretend that I'm making ad hominem attacks, yet I'm just pointing out who's misbehaving and why. Something that is obvious to all, including you two.
If you would be even minimally sincere you would not be trying to corner me against arbitrarily selected Wikipolicies but you would have protested your innocence, first of all. You are just playing legalism.
If you want me to refrain from denouncing your behaviour and your agenda the least your could do is to  is to protest your innocence, to explain your reasons, to pretend at least that you are not racist. But you only make attacks ad hominem against my honesty and sincerity.
Keep it that way. I don't mind.  

Personal Attacks

Please refrain from personal attacks which you made in Talk:White_people. Or next time you will be reported to WP:DP.  
I am not making any personal attacks. I honestly think you are a nazi (or close equivalent, if you want to dwell in the small letter and word twists). You haven't even bothered in denying it, so why should I think otherwise. 
If you think that stating that is a personal attack, please say why. I don't think that openly declaring the (apparent) truth is any personal attack but just that: stating facts, so we can discuss honestly.
What is being discussed in that article's talk page is largely ideological and some people of certain ideology (you and DarkTichondrias) are trying to manipulate the participative process of Wikipedia in your favor, editing ignoring the consensus. I honestly believe it is my duty to fight such behaviour and defend the neutrality of Wikipedia. And I will do it.  
If you still arent satisfied, you can ask a request for investigation, but I must warn it can well backfire.  

Of course I wont dignify your silly personal attacks with a response. And you repeated your personal attack with your response. I'll be reporting you.  
Excellent.  

Calling another editor a nazi, regardless of whether you think it is true, is completely unacceptable.  If you continue, you may be blocked for personal attacks.  Please find a more civil way to discuss your concerns about the article.  babelfish 

Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you.   
Stop being hyporcitic and stop spamming my talk page Thulean. I have enough with what Shell Kinney said.  

Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you.  By saying things like ""Nevertheless I will keep protecting the article against unilateral harassment by Thu