Thanks for the understanding The main difficulty I have is that I don t think that the approach favoured by the Wikipedian powers that be is the most helpful for any of us Given a blank sheet of paper I would have a main article concentrating upon the Stratfordian argument and why the proponents of most alternative candidates not most anti Strats reject them Each alternative candidate could then have a very brief mention in the main article mainly historical and one spin off article discussing the case for it along the lines of the Marlovian one In other words if you want to get there I don t think you should be starting from here Peter Farey 82 11 98 197