What was cleverly inserted instead Thanks for assuming bad faith in your edit summary Smatprt Are you really going to put up a separate fight to retain the ugly and illogical use of term on each of the involved pages After there was 100 support for my rewrite at Shakespearean authorship question I was hoping you d have the grace to let it go when I inserted the same changes here May I ask what exactly it is you suspect me of My changes at Shakespearean authorship question were intended as neutral stylistic improvements everybody else thought that s what they were but you keep implying I have some evil agenda and therefore keep reverting me What is that agenda exactly Can t we try to assume that we re all trying to improve William Shakespeare and it s subarticles talk