On second thought Max I just took a look at the history and saw that you posted not only the link that you say you re not defending but also the link to the material from the white supremacist antisemite William Pierce There s no need to keep the link on the page while discussing its merits although that link has no merits to discuss Wikipedia s editors know how to look at edit histories When a link is that egregious and beyond the pale any responsible editor will remove it until it s existence can be justified Also I didn t remove an external link without cause I explained my cause both here and in the edit summary That cause was not a claim that it s offensive in some way but a clear obvious violation of WP EL and WP RS with regard to fringe websites However I ve just taken a look at your edit history and can honestly say that outside of your edits to this article I can t see any evidence of an antisemitic agenda on your part so I m going to continue to WP AGF However it will be to your advantage to recognize that editors who are accustomed to working on Judaism related articles have long experience with users who just innocently raise the question of whether there might be racist material in the Talmud or whether there just might be a Jewish conspiracy for world domination or whether we ve fairly portrayed the views of folks who think that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a genuine document and shouldn t we leave the material up while we discuss it The answer to that question is no and if my assumption of good faith is justified you ll have no trouble seeing why Again Max follow those links and you ll see why neither you nor I nor any responsible editor would want them to stay on this article or any other that we had a hand in I m honestly not trying to start a feud or a flame war or anything else and I do wish you the best experience possible on Wikipedia