Go away with your CIVIL stuff mate If you d have a sense discussion style you d be able to say excuse me you re right on that instead of ignoring whole arguments on a high horse You may be a long time editor here but in this particular case my assertion stands As for the argument on Gundell Gardell likely perhaps but an assumption You can t verify that either unless you are able to verify in the book You did not state wether you verified or not I have to assume you are an authority somehow Great example of how to inject untruth in Wikipedia Next time Wikipedia s credibility is of subject somewhere I ll be sure to reference to this case Just to point out the obvious as argument in that it doesn t matter if its true or not since the problem is that it is unclear wether its verified or not