If you want another voice on the talk page regarding the consensus you can add mine I m with well everyone else What this article doesn t need is to be full of puffery with iffy sourcing You ve come to this page accused Hullaballoo of vandalism a note edits that you disagree with are not vandalism and referring to them as such is offensive and flies right in the face of WP AGF decided that consensus is bogus which I don t agree with and reverted yet again joining the side of a basically disruptive SPA Not the best entrance I must say You might want to think carefully before insulting any more of the editors involved in this article and before reverting with the claim that consensus is bogus Consensus is not voting counting heads doesn t gauge it What s most important is policy and I don t believe the version you just reverted to is particularly in line with the BLP policy OohBunnies talk