That is one explanation Though I think there s just a certain editor who s more prone to making sloppy edits to push POV I m stumbling across stuff that has been in this article awhile now that has no basis in the sources that are cited to support it I m new maybe that happens all the time but I think that excuse falls apart upon investigating contributions I m not touching the section again but I m pretty sure that if the new edit doesn t achieve consensus it ought to be removed and discussed until a conclusion is reached I could be wrong though 70 36 233 104