Timeshifter s dishonesty Timeshifter your story above is text book projection first rate water muddying I grant you but deceit nonetheless But this follows the pattern of your edits Your POV is clear throughout It s pretty simple you believe this recent Lancet study is the Truth and therefore you have to believe that virtually all other sources are way off IraqBodyCount is a wild underestimate ILCS is not legitimate etc Basically every edit you ve made on all these pages is carefully orchestrated and loaded to lead everyone toward these beliefs Now you re pissed that I ve ever so slightly gotten in the way of your prolific POV pushing by deleting a miniscule fraction of it and now you re playing the victim Let s put that act aside and look at what I ve actually deleted I ve reverted basically three things here 1 Lancet page claims about a supposed ILCS baseline 2002 mortality rate Fabrications do not belong on wiki pages I deleted that fabrication The only sourced material I deleted was stuff about Lancet baseline rates that were cited accurately enough but only had any relevance to this section because they were being related to the fabrication I was removing Once the fabricated ILCS baseline rate is removed the surrounding sourced material from Lancet that I deleted no longer has any relevance to the section It is entirely out of context and so properly removed along with the fabrication The sourced material that was there makes no sense being there unless the fabrication is there so I removed it along with the fabrication 2 IBC page I deleted an inaccurate and out of context claim authored by Timeshifter I added a statement which says IBC showed an example of something and provided a citation for this Timeshifter then adds that Lancet authors dispute this claim from IBC and he puts a footnote onto this but the footnote leads to quotes by Lancet authors that address something else entirely Thus this claim of Timeshifter s is properly removed as it is falsely described as one thing when it is something else and the citation leads to something that is different than how it s described So the first two are just simple falsehoods and fabrications Apparently it s against the rules and POV favoring to delete POV pushing falsehoods and fabrications 3 IBC page Guatemala study I ve questioned the relevance of this to IBC and the accuracy of the description and discussed this on the talk page This one is at least more debatable than the others as it is just tangential cherry picking for a POV rather than just fabrications and falsehoods for a POV Deleting these three things has been my great crime causing poor Timeshifter so much pain and anguish yeah right As I ve already said I can t keep up with Timeshifter s proselytizing for the Lancet study on all these various pages He s very commited to the cause as proselytizers tend to be